This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Court of First Instance of Rizal
G.R. No. L-41093 October 30, 1978 Facts: In May 1962 private respondent Millan bought a lot from petitioner corporation and paid in full her installments on December 22, 1971, but it was only on March 2,1973, that a Deed of Absolute Sale was executed in her favor. Notwithstanding the lapse of almost three (3) years since she made her last payment, petitioner corporation still failed to convey the corresponding transfer certificate of title (TCT) to Millan who accordingly was compelled to file a complaint for specific performance and damages against petitioner on August 14, 1974. One of the prayers in the complaint include the payment of damages, corrective and actual in the sum of P15,000.00. The trial court ruled in favor of Millan and ordered petitioner to pay her nominal damages in the amount of P20,000.00 plus attorney’s fees in the amount of P5k and costs. Petitioner corporation now questions the award for nominal damages of 20k and attorney’s fees of 5k which are allegedly excessive and unjustified. Issue: Whether or not the trial court was correct in awarding nominal damages? Ruling: The trial court did not err in awarding nominal damages; however, the circumstance of the case warrant a reduction of the amount of 20k granted to privaterespondent Millan. There can be no dispute that petitioner corporation was guilty of delay, amounting to nonperformance of its obligation, in issuing the TCT to vendee Millan who had fully paid up her installments on the lot bought by her. Article 1170 of the Civil Code expressly provides that those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence or delay and those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. However, vendee Millan submitted her case without presenting evidence on the actual damages suffered by her as a result of the nonperformance of petitioner’s obligation under the deed of sale.
NONETHELESS, the facts show that the right of the vendee to acquire title to the lot bought by her was violated by petitioner and this entitles her at the very least to nominal damages. Nominal damages are not intended for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication o recognition of a right violated or invaded. They are recoverable where some injury has been done the amount of which the evidence fails to show, the assessment of damages being left to the discretion of the court according to the circumstance of the case. In the situation now before Us, We are of the view that the amount of 20k is excessive. The admitted fact that petitioner failed to furnish Millan the TCT because said lot was mortgaged to GSIS does not in itself show that there was bad faith. Bad faith cannot be presumed. Millan’s contention that the 20k award may be considered in the nature of exemplary damages cannot be upheld because in case of breach of contract, exemplary damages may be awarded if the guilty party acted in wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner.
Enervida vs. Dela Torre
G.R. No. L-38037 January 28, 1974 Facts: Petitioner Roque Enervida filed a complaint against the defendantspouses de la Torre, praying that the deed of sale executed on December 3, 1957 by his deceased father, Ciriaco Enervida, over a parcel of land covered by a Homestead Patent be declared null and void for having been executed within the prohibited period of five years, in violation of Section 118 of Commonwealth Act 141 (Public Land Law) and that he be allowed to repurchase said parcel of land for being the legitimate son and sole heir of his deceased father. The defendants filed their answer, stating that the plaintiff has no cause of action against them as his father, Ciriaco Enervida, is still living, the petitioner is not only son of Ciriaco Enervida as he has also four other living children and that the sale of the property in question did not take place within the prohibited period provided for in Section 118 of the Public Land Law, the sale having taken place on November 20, 1957, although ratified and acknowledged on December 3, 1957, before a Notary Public. During the pre-trial conference, petitioner admitted that his father is still living and that he has four other living brothers and sisters who were not joined as party-plaintiffs. He also admitted that the sale of the land in question actually took place on November 20, 1957, but was formalized only on December 3, 1957. He likewise admitted that the homestead patent was issued on November 17, 1952 to his father, which was beyond the prohibited period of 5 years. The CFI ruled that petitioner has no cause of action and was prompted with malice and bad faith in taking his action to court by alleging false statement in his complaint. The court dismissed the case and ordered the petitioner to pay the defendants P2000 as actual moral and exemplary damages and pay also the attorney’s fees. On appeal to Court of Appeals, it certified the case to the Supreme Court for it involved purely question of law. Issue: Whether or not it is proper to award the defendant an actual moral and exemplary damages when plaintiff filed unfounded civil case.
Ruling: NO. The Supreme Court ruled that with regard to the award of TWO THOUSAND PESOS "in concept of actual, moral and exemplary damages ...", the same is not proper for it would ran counter to the decision of this Court in Deogracias Malonzo vs Gregoria Galang (109 Phil. 16, 18, 19) where it was ruled: Finally, with respect to moral damages, we are inclined to agree with petitioner that these damages are not recoverable herein, notwithstanding the finding of the trial court and the Court of Appeals that his complaint against respondents were clearly unfounded or unreasonable. It will be observed that unlike compensatory or actual damages which are generally recoverable in tort cases as long as there is satisfactory proof thereof (Art. 2202), the Code has chosen to enumerate the cases in which moral damages, may be recovered (Art. 2219). A like enumeration is made in regard to the recovery of attorney's fees as an item of damage (Art. 2208). But the two enumerations differ in the case of a clearly unfounded suit, which is expressly mentioned in Art. 2208 (par. 4), as justifying an award of attorney's fees, but is not included in the enumeration of Art. 2219 in respect to moral damages. It is true that Art. 2219 also provides that moral damages may be awarded in "analogous cases" to those enumerated, but we do not think the Code intended" a clearly unfounded civil action or proceedings" to be one of these analogous cases wherein moral damages may be recovered, or it would have expressly mentioned it in Art. 2219, as it did in Art. 2208; or else incorporated Art. 2208 by reference in Art. 2219. Besides, Art. 2219 Specifically mentions "quasi-delicts causing physical injuries", as an instance when moral damages may be allowed, thereby implying that all other quasi-delicts not resulting in physical injuries are excluded (Strebel vs. Figueras, 96 Phil. 321), excepting, of course, the special torts referred to in Art. 309, par. 9, Art. 2219) and in Arts. 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, and 34, 35 on the chapter on human relations (par. 10, Art. 2219). Furthermore, while no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, the amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the court (Art. 2216), it is, nevertheless, essential that the claimant satisfactorily prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage (Art. 2217) and its causal relation to defendant's acts. This is so because moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category
of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer (Algara vs. which they are intended to be. 27 Phil. Sandejas. in other words. . rather than a compensation for actual injury suffered. Moral damages. 294). are not corrective or exemplary damages. which they are not. The trial court and the Court of Appeals both seem to be of the opinion that the mere fact that respondent were sued without any legal foundation entitled them to an award of moral damages. Such a conclusion would make of moral damages a penalty. hence they made no definite finding as to what the supposed moral damages suffered consist of.
Editha again directed Lamenta to see Solomon Silverio. Subsequently. the demand telegram addressed to Aklan Drug was still sent to Editha Mijares.00 as attorney's fees and the costs of suit. Court of Appeals.000. The RTC concluded that petitioners were not the owners of said drugstore when the deliveries were made and the absence of any privity of relations between the parties at the time of the deliveries precludes any cause of action in favor of Metro Drug against petitioners.000. P10. under the account name Farmacia delos Remedios amounting to P14. a concessionaire of a small area right inside the hospital compound where it operated a drugstore. Legaspi. Saba v. G. to wit: a) malice. Settled in our jurisprudence is the rule that moral damages cannot be recovered from a person who has filed a complaint against another in good . 1986. the RTC dismissed the complaint and ordered Metro Drug to pay the petitioners P30. Mijares as owners of Aklan Drug had been buying pharmaceutical products from private respondent Metro Drug since 1976. Inc. Metro Drug filed a telegram addressed to Aklan Drug demanding full payment of outstanding account for P27. On November 26. Jr. Solomon Silverio as the new lessee. 1997 Facts: Petitioners Editha Mijares and Glicerio T. Thus. In China Banking Corporation vs. requires the presence of two elements.R. 189 SCRA 50 ). mere filing of a suit does not render a person liable for malicious prosecution should he be unsuccessful. Silverio as the new operator and concessionaire of the drugstore. 113558 April 18." denied Metro Drug's allegations and interposed a counterclaim for malicious prosecution and prayed for moral damages. Court of Appeals. was also an officer of the Ospital Ng Maynila Consumers Cooperative. In partial payment of these receivables.46. and b) absence of probable cause. a Contract of Lease was entered into between the City of Manila as Lessor and Solomon Silverio. the Cooperative was dissolved and stopped its operations in October 1986. Mijares vs. the new owner of the drugstore. Court of Appeals. Hence.Editha M. the total value of which amounted to P32. 208 SCRA 377 . as Lessee. Lamenta tried to collect from Editha Mijares for the disputed claim. Petitioners have failed to show that private respondent was motivated by bad faith when it instituted the action for collection below. On November 1. attorney’s fees and expenses of suit. The check however was subsequently dishonored due to insufficient fund. 141 SCRA 488 ). for the law could not have meant to impose a penalty on the right to litigate (Ponce v. Issue: Whether the award of moral damages in favor of petitioners was proper Ruling: No. Moreover. but Editha referred him to Mr. Metro Drug filed before the Regional Trial Court of Manila a complaint for a sum of money against petitioners Editha Mijares and Glicerio T. Rubio v. and that it was initiated deliberately knowing that the charge was false and baseless (Manila Gas Corporation vs. put up a drugstore on the same area occupied by the Cooperative. Petitioners in their "Answer With Compulsory Counterclaim. 1986. Jr. Despite said verbal notice. both in criminal and civil cases. Metro Drug delivered pharmaceutical products to the said store thru Dioscoro Lamenta.180.06. Court of Appeals and Metro Drug. Thereafter. On Lamenta's follow-up of said telegram. we held that: x x x Malicious prosecution. Mijares and Glicerio T. Editha Mijares. Court of Appeals. a check was drawn by Solomon Silverio. its salesman/collector. Mijares. aside frombeing the operator of Aklan Drug.42. More deliveries of pharmaceutical products were made in the same place by Metro Drug. The Ospital ng Maynila Cooperative also had some transactions with Metro Drug as supplier of pharmaceutical products. No.938. The Court of Appeals however reversed the decision of the RTC.034. She informed him verbally that they have no more business inside the Ospital ng Maynila as the cooperative drugstore has already stopped operations. there must be proof that the prosecution was prompted by a sinister design to vex and humiliate a person. 100 SCRA 602 ).00 for moral damages.
the award for attorney's fees and expenses of litigation must likewise be deleted. 159 SCRA 433 . Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. 179 SCRA 5 ). or without malice or bad faith (Philippine National Bank v. itis damnum absque injuria (Ilocos Norte Electrical Company v. . For the same reasons. R & B Surety and Insurance v. 129 SCRA 736 ). Court of Appeals.faith. If damage results from the filing of the complaint.
000. She was found to have a “traumatic amputation.” Issue: Whether or not the damages should be mitigated by contributory negligence of the Valenzuela for parking alongside Aurora Blvd. we are of the opinion that the amount of P1. with only some skin and sucle connected to the rest of the body. damage and injury which goes with the sudden severing of a vital portion of the human body. She stopped at a lighted place where there were people. It was proven through the investigation of the scene of the accident and the testimonies of the witnesses that Valenzuela was properly parked and that Li should have seen her parked by the sidewalk.suffered by Valenzuela as a result of Li’s grossly negligent driving of his Mitsubishi Lancer in the early morning hours of the accident. All of these adjustments. she will be required to undergo adjustments in her prosthetic devise due to the shrinkage of the stump from the process of healing. A prosthetic device. The sensory functions are forever lost. are painful. changes. No. As the amount of moral damages are subject to this Court’s discretion. Ruling: Valenzuela is not guilty of contributory negligence. even with the use of state of the art prosthetic technology. The foregoing discussion does not even scratch the surface of the nature of the resulting damage because it would be highly speculative to estimate the amount of psychological pain. Valenzuela will forever be deprived of the full ambulatory functions of her left extremity. She was standing at the left side of the rear of her car pointing to the tools to a man who will help her fix the tire when a car suddenly bumped her which was driven Richard Li and registered under Alexander Commercial Inc. Having been told by the people present that her rear right tire was flat and that she cannot reach her home in that car’s condition. alighted from the car. Her left leg was severed up to the middle of her thigh. The damage done to her would not only be permanent and lasting. sleeplessness.R. 115024 February 7. Lourdes Valenzuela is driving along Aurora Blvd. it would also be permanently changing and adjusting to the physiologic changes which her body would normally undergo through the years. 1996 Facts: Ma. . There is no question that Li was the one negligent in the accident.Valenzuela v. CA G. it has been documented. leg. Because of the impact.00 granted by the trial court is in greater accord with the extent and nature of the injury -. when she noticed something wrong with her tires. which entire area is a no parking zone. will only allow a reasonable amount of functional restoration of the motor functions of the lower limb. however technologically advanced. Because of this. to verify whether she had a flat tire and to solicit help if needed. mental and physical pain are inestimable.000. she parked along the sidewalk. and adjustments will require corresponding adjustive physical and occupational therapy. put on her emergency lights. psychological injury. left up to distal thigh (above knee). physical and psychological . Well beyond the period of hospitalization (which was paid for by Li). Valenzuela underwent a traumatic amputation of her left lower extremity at the distal left thigh just above the knee. and went to the rear to open the trunk. she was thrown against the windshield of the defendant. As a result of the accident. The replacements. The resultant anxiety.
or the weight of their testimony. 1997 Facts: The petitioner was charged with the crime of attempted homicide allegedly armed with a . however. it is necessary to prove with a reasonable degree of certainty.000. Anent the award of damages. and his oral testimony that the petitioner shot his wife. thus the said accused having commenced the commission of Homicide directly by overt acts and did not perform all acts of execution which should have produced the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. 17 The petitioner belabors the increase in the amount of moral damages to P10. Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines G. did then and there willfully. . The petitioner contends that a material discrepancy exists between the complainant's sworn statement that the petitioner fired at him first before shooting Leonarda. According full faith and credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.000. the trial court rendered a decision convicting the petitioner of the crime of attempted homicide. Time and again this Court has held that inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses when referring only to minor details and collateral matters do not affect either the substance of their declaration. Eliminating the award of actual or compensatory damages in the form of hospitalization expenses and loss of income.Aurelio Sumalpong vs. premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable by the injured party.R. this Court cannot but concur with the trial court and the Court of Appeals in finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged. Issue: W/N the petitioner is guilty and liable for damages. 123404 February 26. Such inconsistencies reinforce rather than weaken their credibility and suggest that they are telling the truth.00 and the award of nominal damages in an equivalent amount when the complainant did not appeal the decision of the trial court to the Court of Appeals. Leonarda. their veracity. assault and shot (sic) one Arsolo Ramos. the actual amount of loss.00 justified under the circumstances. the defense would have us believe that it was the complainant who had a gun which he intended to use against the petitioner after the latter's heated altercation with Leonarda. To justify a grant of actual or compensatory damages. unlawfully and feloniously attack. On the other hand.38 caliber revolver and with intent to kill. No. this Court upholds the Court of Appeals' ruling on the matter. before firing at him twice. the Court of Appeals cited the failure of the complainant to offer any proof of the same. The Court finds the award of nominal and moral damages both in the amount of P10. Ruling: In view of the foregoing.
the court rendered its decision in favor of Flores. On 12 July 1989. we rule that the award of moral and exemplary damages is patently excessive and should be reduced to a reasonable amount.00 is obviously not proportionate to the actual losses of P100. a money counter.00 moral damages.00 moral damages and P1.00 and P40. In its answer PNB insisted that only P900. Upon his return to Manila. Flores filed a case with the RCT of Quezon City against PNB.040. We take into consideration the following factors: First. Having no other option.000.00 exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees and costs of the suit.000. P1.000. Flores presented these checks at the Baguio Hyatt Casino unit of PNB.00 bank charges were actually paid by Flores when he purchased the two checks. That it was dues to Flores’ demanding attitude and temper that Montes.000. this Court ruled that they should be reduces to more reasonable amounts. to which the court affirmed the decision of the lower court. PNB also refused to encash one of the five checks until after it is cleared by the Manila Pavilion Hotel unit.000.000. Left with no other choice. 116181 April 17. made an error in good faith in issuing a receipt for P1.00 sustained by Flores. A Formal Demand was made by Flores’ counsel but PNB persisted in its refusal to honor the check.00. are in the category of an award designed to compensate the .000.00 each. the award of moral damages in the amount of P1. But PNB refused to encash the checks but after a lengthy discussion. prejudice or corruption on the part of the Trial Court.00 exemplary damages in addition to Flores' actual claim of P100. it agreed to encash one (1) of the checks but the payment was deferred until after Flores agrees that it be broken down into five manager’s checks.00 representing the amount of the check dishonored with interest thereon at the legal rate per annum from November 16. Rodriguez.00 is "inordinately disproportionate and unconscionable.000. 1989 until fully paid.000. as well as ordering PNB to pay Flores P1. But in more recent cases where the amount of moral and exemplary damages are far too excessice compared to the actual losses sustained by the aggrieved party.000.000.Philippine National Bank vs. Mr. A receipt for said amount was issued by the PNB. Flores' contention that he lost the opportunity to purchase a house and lot in Baguio City due to petitioner's gross negligence is based solely on his own testimony and a mere general statement at that.000.00. however.000.000. After trial. the moral damages awarded must be commensurate with the loss or injury suffered." Under the circumstances obtaining in the case at bench.R. we give consideration to PNB’s allegation that the award of P1.00 moral and exemplary damages in addition to actual claim of inordinately disproportionate and unconscionable? Ruling: YES. Issue: Is the award of P1. Second. PNB appealed to the CA.000. Their subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied.” In other words. Hence this petition. he tried to encash the checks through its Malate Branch but to no avail. ordering PNB to pay the sum of P100. paying a total of P1. No.040. Nick Buendia was not even presented to confirm the aforementioned allegation. Moral damages though incapable of pecuniary estimations.000. In RCPI v. Court of Appeals G. We concur with the findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeals.000.000.000. 1996 Facts: Flores purchased from PNB two (2) manager's checks worth P500. The broker he named during his cross-examination. SC ruled that: “it is undisputed that the trial courts are given discretion to determine the amount of moral damages and that the Court of Appeals can only modify of change the amount awarded when they are palpably and scandalously excessive so as to indicate that it was the result of passion. Flores agreed to such an arrangement. including the service charge.
diversion or amusements that will serve to obviate the moral suffering he has undergone. and 2.000.000. of the spiritual status quo ante. PNB’s act of issuing the manager's checks and corresponding receipt before payment thereof was completely counted reckless and grossly negligent. Exemplary damages are imposed not to enrich one party or impoverish another but to serve as a deterrent against or as a negative incentive to curb socially deleterious actions. premises considered. . They are awarded only to enable the injured party to obtain means.000.00 exemplary damages is also far too excessive and should likewise be reduced to an equitable level. Its award is aimed at the restoration. The award of exemplary damages is reduced from P1. the assailed decision is hereby MODIFIED as follows: 1.00. by reason of the defendant's culpable action.claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. The award of moral damages is reduced from P1. It is not intended to enrich a complainant at the expense of the defendant. and it must be proportional to the suffering inflicted.00. WHEREFORE.00 to P25.00 to P100.000. within the limits of the possible. the award of P1.000.000.000. It is an appalling breach of bank procedures and must never be repeated However.000.
Rule I.950 and a “Fit to work” certification from Philippine Medical Test System which is duly accredited for overseas workers.000 for moral and exemplary damages and 10% for attorney’s fees. Osdana left for Riyadh. Canizares Jr. 1992 and started working for GCC. Inc. Due to the workload. National Labor Relations Commision. 1995 with a medical certificate stating that “she had very good improvement of the symptoms” but was dismissed from work four days after and was sent back to the Philippines for grounds of illness.076 for her unpaid salaries. Issue: Whether or Not award for moral and exemplary damages was justified Ruling: Yes. Labor Arbiter Potenciano S. If the disease or ailment can be cured within such period. and Erlinda Osdana G.499 as salry for unexpired contract and $1. Sauidi Arabia on September 16. Osdana was also awarded P50. she was allowed to work as a food server and cook at the Hota Bani Tameem Hospital seven days a week without compensation from August 22 to October 5. which affirmed the decision on March 11. Respondent then needed to undergo two surgerical operations. a company based in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. the employer shall not terminate his employment unless there is a certification by a competent public authority that the disease of such nature or at such a stage that it cannot be cured within a period of six months with proper medical treatment. one in January 1994 and the other on April 23. A Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Syndrome is not contagious therefore will not harm her co workers and the fact that she was given a medical certificate that stated that she had shown very good improvements made sure that she was able to work again without having to harm herself. No. 1993. Osdana’s dismissal also was not backed up by a certification from a competent public authority that would state that she is not eligible to work anymore. Hon. Disease as grounds for dismissal – Where the eployee suffers from a disease and his continued employment is prohibited by law or prejudicial to his health or to the health of his coemployees. . Osdana was then asked to sign another “Contractor Employee Agreement” which stated that she will be employed for 12 months as a “waitress” with a salary of $280 which was the agreement that was approved by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA).Triple Eight Integrated Services. This then led to Osdana being diagnosed with Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Sec. she did not work as a food server as stated in her contract but was made to wash dishes and pots at the Oleysha University. Petitioner appealed to the NLRC. The employer shall reinstate employee to his former position immediately upon the restoration of his normal health. 129584 December 3. She was sent back to work at the Oleysha University to do the same tasks as she did. the award for moral and exemplary damages was justified as petitioner was clearly in violation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules and regulations. 8. She was then again confined at the Ladies Villa without salary from October 6 to October 23. Osdana’s contract stated that she is to work there for a period of thirty-six (36) months with a salary of fine hundred fifty Saudi Rials (SR550) as a food server or a waitress. Osdana was not given any work assignments in between the two operations without any compensation despite the fact that she was willing and her doctors advised that she can do light work. Before contract was finalized. She was not given separation pay. 1998 Facts: In August 1992. Osdana was released from the hospital on April 25. Petitioner claimed that Osdana was in a foreign land that is why they were unable to get such certification here in the Philippines but what the petitioner failed to notice is that the section only needed a certification from a competent public authority and did not require such certification to come from the Philippines. She was also made to do janitorial works and tasks none of which are included in the job description.000 and P20. Sec 8. Osdana suffered from numbness and much pain in her arms that she needed to be confined from June 18 – August 22. private respondent Erlinda Osdana was recruited by petitioner together with petitioner’s principal Gulf Catering Company (GCC).R. 1993 for no apparent reason. 1993 at the Ladies Villa and during such time. Osdana was also made to work in 12 hour shifts from 6:00am to 6:00pm without overtime pay. In Riyadh. the employer shall not terminate the employee but shall ask the employee to take a leave. Book VI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code provides. she was not paid her salaries. Osdana filed a complaint before the POEA and ordered petitioner to pay $2. vs. 1997. 1994. After the confinement. she needed to complete some requirements including a payment of P11.
000-Actual damages. The Trial Court denied the motion and the MFC went to the CA but was rebuffed. They also prayed for an award of moral damages in the sum of P3.000.000.. and the latter’s judgment was in turn affirmed by the Supreme Court with modification of the fine to P5. walls. Are the Del Rosarios entitled to payment of Actual damages. injury was also caused to its electric al wiring. Engr. and Exemplary damages? Ruling: Yes. contending that aside from the destruction of the roof. holding that there was a privity of contract between the Del Rosarios and MFC.000. and the latter is liable for breach of its contract for the supply and installation of the roofing materials and ordered MFC to pay: P1. The representations.000.000.000. Inc. wood parquet flooring and furniture and reckoned their actual damages at P1. It alleged that MFC made representations on the durability of the product and the sturdiness of its installation through massive advertisements in print media and television. The decision of the DTI was affirmed in toto by the Office of the President. The quibbling whether Engr. The DTI rendered judgment declaring that MFC had indeed misrepresented its product because strong winds actually blew off part of the structure/roof of the Del Rosario Spouses. fixtures. The repair work was observed and analyzed by the Esteban Adjusters and Valuers. Puno (identified as the Del Rosario’s contractor). finding that MFC acted in bad faith and/or with gross negligence. Puno acted as MFC’s agent in the signing of contracts for the supply and installation of the “Banawe” shingles. restoration. No.Del Rosario vs. portions of the roof were blown away by strong wind brought about by typhoon “Ruping”. Court of Appeals G. 1990 charged MFC (Metal Forming Corporation) with a violation of Section 3 of Act no. particularly those characterizing the shingles as “STRUCTURALLY SAFE AND STRONG” and that the “BANAWE METAL TILE structure acts as a single unit against wind and storm pressure due to the strong hook action on its overlaps” prompted the Del Rosarios to buy the ‘Banawe’ shingles and had them installed in their residence.000. exemplary damages in the amount of P1. P500. Bonds. Stocks. and Eng. ceiling. which was engaged by the Del Rosarios to determine the cause of the destruction and the Adjusters submitted a report concluding that the “Banawe’ metal tiles which were detached from the roof trusses were not fastened according to instructions. MFC moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of cause of action stating that it had no contractual relationship with the Del Rosarios since the contract for the purchase and installation of the roofing was actually entered into between it and another person. 300. The Del Rosarios went to the SC. it was the . whether or not there was privity of contract. Puno acted as agent of MFC or the Spouses is pointless. Mislabeling or Misbranding of Any Product. design and specifications.003. Issues: Whether or not MFC is answerable to the Del Rosarios for the damage caused. It appears that MFC replaced and repaired the roof free of charge because it was still covered by the one-year warranty.000 and attorney’s fees in the amount of P1. but barely two months after the completion of the installation. and/or replacement of the damaged areas and items and also the cost of the inspection conducted by the independent adjuster. etc”.00 estimating the repair. MFC was accordingly sentenced to pay an administrative fine of P10.000-Exemplary Damages. 3740 “An Act to Penalize Fraudulent Advertising. 1997 Facts: The Del Rosarios filed on November 21. The RTC ruled in favor of the Del Rosarios. The recourse to the Supreme Court was unsuccessful.008. 118325 January 21.000.000.Moral Damages. Not only that MFC’s tiles were delivered to the Del Rosrios and were used in fabricating the roof of their home. MFC appealed to the CA. This prompted the latter to commence a civil action against MFC in the RTC of Manila to recover from MFC damages. wall paper. Moral Damages.R. The CA reversed the Trial Court’s judgment and ruled that there was no privity of contract between the Del Rosarios and MFC. MFC however declined to concede liability.
and thereby caused them considerable injury. not to estimate and assess it. it was held that moral damages though incapable of pecuniary estimation. feelings of shock. and since there is no basis for such award. The moral damages were awarded for indemnity or reparation not punishment or correction. are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. It held that the plaintiffs’ sufferingshave duly and substantially proven by the defendant’s fraudulent actuation and breach of warranty and thereby entitled for the claim of damages and litigation costs as it has caused sufferings. but must be duly proved and proved with reasonable degree of certainty. satisfactory evidence of the psychological and mental trauma actually suffered by the Del Rosarios. But the report contains no statement whatever of the amount of the damage.employees and workers of MFC who delivered the shingles or metal tiles to the construction site of the Del Rosarios’ home and they undertook and completed the installation thereof.” There being. the identity of the individual who actually dealt with MFC and asked the latter to make such delivery and installation is of little moment. The Court also agrees that exemplary damages are properly exigible of MFC. it should be removed. and are allowable only when specifically prayed for in the complaint. The Del Rosarios contend that the pecuniary detriment to their home amounted to P1. Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed. The law explicitly authorizes the award of moral damages “in breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith. they need not be proved. There is therefore no evidentiary foundation upon which to lay an award of actual damages.008. although plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral. . since MFC in bad faith and gross negligence infringed the express warranty made by it to the general public in connection with the “Banawe” tiles brought to and set up in the house of the Del Rosarios who had relied on the warranty. The award for attorney’s fees must be deleted because the judgment of the Trial Court’s decision does not say why they are awarded. Article 2229 of the Civil Code provides that such damages may be imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. These they did in bad faith. using inferior materials and assembling them in a manner contrary to MFC’s express representations in its brochures and advertisements which had induced the Del Rosarios to choose the metal tiles in question for their roofing. helplessness. the grant to them of moral damages is warranted. moreover. While exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right. They are imposed not to enrich one party or impoverish another but to serve as a deterrent against or as a negative incentive to curb socially deleterious actions. They rely on the Report of the Esteban Adjusters. The Trial Court’s grand thereof must be struck down. In fine. In Makabili vs CA.003. fears and embarrassment and anger. Indeed. an award to entitle the injured party to obtain means of diversions and amusement that will serve to alleviate the moral sufferings he has undergone by reason of defendant’s culpable action. The grant of moral and exemplary damages was justified by the Trial Court. the representative of the Esteban Adjusters is that his firm had been retained only to determine the cause of the damage.
Hence this petition for certiorari.m. Petitioners were not informed of these changes despite having complied with the Airline’s policy of 72 hours booking confirmation in their Manila office. actual. since said award cannot co-exist witha duly proven actual or compensatory award for damages. Moral damages awarded by the RTC should be reinstated and an award of exemplary damages may also be awarded on account of private respondent’s negligence. Private respondent appealed said ruling before the CA which deleted the awarding of nominal and moral damages. Hence. said award should be given as even though petitioners were not able to testify Dr. Hence they filed this action for Damages. As to the award for moral damages. No. 88561 April 20. Northewest Airlines G. On their return trip from Manila to the US scheduled on January 17. and nominal damages. 1982. anxiety. CA held that nominal damages cannot co-exist with an award for a duly proven actual and compensatory damage.m flight schedule. aside from the petitioners being inconvenienced. The RTC held for petitioners herein citing that there was negligence on the part of NorthwestAirlines justifying the awarding of moral. . Having failed to board said flight. Herman’s brother Atty. nor did their tickets bear the 9:15a. the petitioners decided to spend Christmas in the Philippines. furthermore this court took into consideration the circumstances in the Philippines at the time where there is a political unrest due the assassination of Ninoy Aquino. They purchased 3 round trip tickets from the US to Manila and back from private respondent Northwest Airlines. they were unable to board their plane despite the fact that they arrived a good 1 hour and 15 minutes ahead of their 10:30 a. 1990 Facts: In October 1989.R. they were unable to meet their personal and professional commitments in the US. Issue: WON CA erred in eliminating the awards for nominal and moral damages awarded by the RTC. nominal damages were rightfully deleted as it cannot co-0exist with actual damages. Armovit was able to testify as to his personal knowledge or how his brother’s family were treated at the check-in counter of Northwest Airlines. wounded feelings among others.Armovit vs CA.m. Ruling: The deletion of the award for nominal damages is correct. Moral damages on the other hand cannot be proven if petitioners were not able to testify to the extent that said negligence of private respondent affected them as to cause emotional stress. flight They were informed at the check-in counter that the flight had been moved to 9: 15 a.
et al." defendants . and there can be no recovery for distress caused by sympathy for another's suffering. of Criminal Case No.Strebel vs. defendant Cornelio S. they said that "with a view to further injuring him and besmirching his good name in the community and waging a cleavage in the harmonious relation between Eustaquio & Co. R.500. in relation to Commonwealth Act No. 444. Primo Eustaquio. the right of recovery for mental suffering resulting from bodily injuries is restricted to the person who has suffered the bodily hurt. Strebel asked Secretary Nepomuceno to mediate between them and Under-Secretary Figueras to forget about pastfamily problems. an Assistant City Fiscal of Manila. using his official and political influence. then Under. to this effect. as well as in connivance with the Director of Labor. defendant Figueras. Strebel by a previous marriage.Secretary of Labor. although before the filing of the information the defendants collectively and singly knew that the allegations therein are false said criminal case was subsequently dismissed by the Court of First Instance of Manila for failure of the prosecution to establish even a prima facie case against the accused. Strebel also claims that defendant Figueras "by making use of his official and political connections." defendant Jose Figueras "tried all he could to built a drainage through" the aforementioned property. and other employees in the Department and Bureau of Labor. Another allegation made by plaintiffs in arguing their cause of action to recover damages. and. Strebel later on claims that Figueras still didn’t forget about the past and making use of his official and political influence. a husband or wife cannot recover for mental suffering caused by his or her sympathy for the other's suffering. as stated in the American Jurisprudence. The latter's wife is a daughter of Mrs. Manila. and. a partnership organized by said plaintiff and one Primo Eustaquio. and its laborers. holding that the City of Manila has a right to construct said drainage. but to a relative by affinity of said plaintiff. "Out of spite and with a view to the eventual acquisition of the said property for himself and his men. which office was then held by defendant Felipe E. defendant Figueras succeeded in securing the institution. 303." It should be noted that plaintiff is not even related to Dr. L-4722 December 29. is: "Injury or Wrong to another. 1954 Facts: As a lessee of a lot situated in Santa Mesa. as distinguished from that form of mental suffering which is the accompaniment of sympathy or sorrow for another's suffering or which arises from a contemplation of wrongs committed on the person of another. and with the cooperation of his former secretary. No. not to Strebel.000. G.00 besides actual damages in the amount of P1. In order to accomplish this purpose. from the Bureau of Immigration to the Bureau of Prisons. against Strebel.00 paid to his attorney in defending himself from the malicious charge. The latter constructed thereon a Mobilgas Station which was operated by Eustaquio & Co. in violation of Commonwealth Act No.. 11005 of the Court of First Instance of Manila. make the necessary excavations at the boundary line of said lot leased to Strebel and the lot belonging to Figueras. Hernandez is merely related by affinity. Hernandez. Through the foregoing series of acts. caused his co-defendant Cornelio S. Manuel Hernandez. the husband of Strebel's step daughter. Hence Dr. and damage to his business in the amount of P15. or for fright due to a wrong against a third person. Figueras and his co-defendants have caused moral and mental suffering to Strebel. Figueras. So the anguish of mind arising as to the safety of others who may be in personal peril from the same cause cannot be taken into consideration. Ruperto. Ruperto. his wife. Pursuant to the rule stated. and his entire family. Jose. to such mental pain or suffering as arises from an injury or wrong to the person himself. Issue: Whether or not plaintiff may recover damages for moral and mental suffering? Ruling: As a general rule. and his partner. The rule on this point. — In law mental anguish is restricted as a rule. an Assistant City Fiscal of Manila. one Dr. for allegedly compelling several employees to work more than eight (8) hours a day. to prepare an opinion which was signed by the City Fiscal." was able to induce the Secretary of Justice to transfer temporarily. plaintiff Strebel subleased part thereof to the Standard Vacuum Oil Company.
Jose and Cornelio S. this feature of said provision may not be availed of by the plaintiff herein. an allusion thereto or statement thereof. to the flagrant violation of the eight-hour labor law by the accused. and. neither the number of the case referred to. Ruperto issued a press statement to the effect that plaintiff Strebel and his partner. however. Eustaquio had flagrantly violated the provisions of the Eight-Hour Law and that said Criminal Case had been dismissed by the court on a flimsy ground. inasmuch as the acts set forth in the complaint took place in 1949. unless either results or causes "physical injuries.00. in order to justify said criticism. As regards the malicious prosecution point raised by Strebel. is not actionable.Felipe E." The Supreme Court said that this news item mentions. The reference. was a mere reiteration of the theory of the Bureau of Labor. it merely contains a criticism of the action taken by the court. Although the same article permits recovery of said damages in cases of malicious prosecution. which had been taken up at the hearing held publicly. or before said Code became effective (laws shouldn’t have retroactive effect). Moreover.000. hence. said theory was open for public consumption. nor the names of the persons accused therein. therein imputed to the Director of Labor. which the prosecution had adopted by filing the information in said case. moral damages may not be recovered in cases of crime or tort. and that this statement had "caused moral and mental suffering to the herein plaintiff and damage to his business in the amount of P5. by specific mandate of Article 2219 of the Civil Code of the Philippines." which are lacking in the case at bar. . and settled in a decision already promulgated. Being a matter of court record.
The police asked her son. Romeo was able to free himself but was chased by appellant with a “gatab”. a resident of Tigaon. he is ordered to pay the heirs of the victim in the amount of P50.00 as indemnity. the amount of actual damages was based solely on the bare assertions of Romeo Fabula’s mother. The defense presented Plazo’s cousin. In the absence of receipts. but the award for the same cannot be proved with certainty. as witness. As a result. who knew nothing of the case. went out of her house at around 4:00pm of August 8. 1989 to buy sugar at a nearby store when she saw appellant Plazo boxing with her son Romeo Fabula whose headwas even banged on the post by appellant. P15. P15. a small bolo.000. herein appellant. When Plazo discovered that it was Romeo who pointed the house to the police. they grappled with the bolo and suddenly it was imbedded on Romeo’s chest. The trial court of Camarines Sur found appellant guilty of the crime of murder and sentenced him to pay the sum of P50. However. Camarines Sur.People of the Philippines vs. on the other hand. 120547 January 29. The body was brought to the Municipal building where an autopsy was conducted by Dr. Despite Leonor’s pleas for appellant to stop. When they arrived. tried to pacify the victim who threatened Plazo with a bolo and ran after him. Siso testified that his cousin. Constancio Tam. Likewise. No. claims that the police were looking for appellant’s cousin who had a pending case for robbery.00 as moral damages. where the house of appellant’s cousin was located. Leonor told the people not to touch him because she would be calling a policeman. they saw Romeo’s body with the small bolo in his chest and a detached handle near his body. . Alfredo Siso.00 as actual damages and P10. moral damages cannot be awarded in the absence of any evidence to support its award.R.000. Plazo was charged with murder to which he pleaded not guilty. In the present case. appellant got angry. who testified that Plazo and Romeo grappled with the small bolo after the victim was drunk and wanted to put a bet against Siso in a billiard match. the award of temperate damages is proper. The decision of RTC Camarines Sur is MODIFIED. Edison Plazo G. 2001 Facts: Leonor Fabula.000. he stabbed Romeo in the upper and lower chest area that led to his death. the Municipal Health Officer. When Leonor sought to intervene. Leonor.712.00 as temperate damages. Hence. he got angry and sought to kill her son. and costs. It was settled by the Court that actual damages may awarded when the same is supported by receipts.000. Issue: Whether or not the trial court was correct in awarding actual damages to the heirs of Romeo Fabula Ruling: NO. the Court ruled that temperate damages may be awarded to the family who suffered some pecuniary loss in lieu of actual damages. Leonor asked for help but nobody came to her aid.00 as indemnity. so he pointed the house to them. no actual damages may be awarded.
Ruling: Yes. PAL was still liable for damages for its blatant refusal to accord the so-called amenities equally to all its stranded passengers. On appeal. CA. P200 for their expected stay of two days in Cebu.000 as exemplary damages. boarded a PAL plane in Manila and disembarked in Cebu City where he was supposed to take his connecting flight to Surigao City. No compelling or justifying reason was advanced for such discriminatory and prejudicial conduct. had plenty of rooms available. Contrary to the claim of PAL that cash assistance was given instead because of nonavailability of rooms in hotels. Pantejo was exposed to humiliation and embarrassment especially because of his government position and social prominence. The refund of hotel expenses was surreptitiously and discriminatorily made by PAL as only handful of passengers knew about it. where respondent Pantejo was billeted. Pantejo was informed that the hotel expenses of his co-passengers were reimbursed by PAL. PAL offered to pay P300. Neglect or malfeasance of the carrier's employees naturally could give ground for an action for damages.R. 1997 Facts: On October 23. The manager offered to pay Pantejo P300 which the latter declined. The contract of air carriage. And even if it was a mere privilege. the next day. Fortunately. Hence. then City Fiscal of Surigao City. . When the flight for Surigao was resumed. Said court rendered judgment in favor of Pantejo. The discriminatory act of PAL against Pantejo made PAL liable for moral damages under Article 21 in relation to Article 2219 (10) of the Civil Code. but he was not even informed that he may later on be reimbursed for his hotel expenses. At this point. amounted to bad faith which entitled the passenger to the award of moral damages. Under the peculiar circumstances of this case. The hotel accommodation was not a mere amenity or privilege. plus costs of suit. A contract to transport passengers is quite different in kind and degree from any other contractual relation because of the relation which an air carrier sustains with the public. Pantejo informed the Manager for Departure Services of PAL at Mactan Airport that he was going to sue the airline for discriminating against him. subject to the MODIFICATION regarding the computation of the 6% legal rate of interest on the monetary awards granted therein to private respondent. Pantejo immediately proceeded to the office of PAL and requested for hotel accommodations. As held in Alitalia Airways vs. which the manager realized was an actionable wrong. It invites people to avail of the comforts and advantages it offers. He was not only refused accommodations. such inattention to and lack of care by petitioner airline for the interest of its passengers who were entitled to its utmost consideration. the evidence showed that Sky View Hotel. but with the exclusion of the award of attorney's fees and litigation expenses.000 as attorney's fees. P100. Pantejo requested instead that he be accommodated in a hotel at the expense of PAL as he did not have cash with him at that time but PAL refused. generates a relation attended with a public duty. due to typhoon Osang. No. moral and exemplary damages granted in the judgment of CA were just and equitable. Pantejo was accommodated by Andoni Dumlao and he shared a room with the latter at Sky View Hotel with the promise to pay his share of the expenses upon reaching Surigao. Court of Appeals and Leovigildo A. P150. ordering PAL to pay Pantejo P300 for actual damages. the connecting flight to Surigao City was cancelled. this petition. However. In this case. P15. the awards for actual. It was a company policy whenever a flight is cancelled as testified by several witnesses. Its business is mainly with the travelling public. It was not also true that Pantejo was not listening to the announcements. Leovegildo Pantejo. and 6% interest from the time of the filing of the complaint until said amounts shall have been fully paid. particularly as to their convenience.Philippine Airlines vs. 120262 July 17.000 as moral damages. 1988. therefore. But the interest of 6% imposed should be computed from the date of rendition of judgment and not from the filing of the complaint.00 to Pantejo only after the latter had confronted the manager of PAL about the discrimination committed against Pantejo. In fact. Pantejo only came to know about the reimbursements when other passengers informed him that they were able to obtain the refund for their own hotel expenses. Pantejo filed a suit for damages against PAL in the Regional Trial Court of Surigao City. CA affirmed the decision. Pantejo G. The judgment of Court of Appeals was AFFIRMED. Issue: Whether or not PAL was liable for damages. PAL initially gave out cash assistance of P100 and. there was bad faith on the part of PAL.
The fact that the record on appeal was admitted for filing is the best evidence that Atty. He who claims actual or compensatory damages must establish and prove by competent evidence actual pecuniary loss (Malonzo vs. besmirched reputation for losing the opportunity to substantiate his claim made while testifying in open court that he was entitled to collect the sum of P4. serious anxiety upon learning that his adversary had won by a mere technicality.2217. L-4722. which Ventanilla could have recovered if the appeal had duly been perfected. 27. 29. 2219) and in Arts.29. 32. Dec. moral. and so trial court did not err in refusing to award temperate or moderate damages to the Ventanilla. the special torts referred to in Art.000 and damages from the defendants in Civil Case No. Ruling: AS REGARDS ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES: Ventanilla is not entitled to such damages as his basis is highly speculative. Article 2199 of the New Civil Code provides: Except as provided by law or by stipulation. Issue: Whether or not the trial court erred in not ordering Centeno to pay him actual or compensatory. Ventanilla lost his chance to recover from the defendants therein the sum of P4. AS REGARDS EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE DAMAGES: It cannot be recovered as a matter of right and the court will decide . one is entitled to an adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. Arts. 9. CONCERNING TEMPERATE OR MODERATE DAMAGES: Considering that he is not entitled to actual or compensatory damages but has been awarded nominal damages by the trial court." as an instance when moral damages may be allowed.Art. 30. and not P2. Galang: “. such award precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages. 10. Centeno. 10. Ventanilla’s allegation that by Centeno’s negligence in not paying the appeal bond of P60. Trial court rendered judgment in favor of Ventanilla ordered Centeno to pay Ventanilla the sum of P200 as nominal damages and the costs. . temperate or moderate.R. The record on appeal was disapproved because it was filed out of time and no appeal bond had been filed by the plaintiff. Centeno for neglecting to perfect within the reglementary period his appeal from an adverse judgment rendered by the CFI of Manila. of course. Gregorio Centeno G. in ordering that only the sum of P200 be paid to him. Ventanilla appealed to the Court of Appeals which certified the case to this Court on the ground that only questions of law are raised. and wounded feelings for the Centeno’s failure to remain faithful to his client and worthy of his trust and confidence. 14333 January 28. thereby implying that all other quasi-delicts not resulting in physical injuries are excluded (Strebel vs. excepting. 2219. 26. 2219 and 2220 NCC) Malonzo vs.Oscar Ventanilla vs. and exemplary or corrective damages. The defendant did not appeal. and in not ordering that the sum of P500 as attorney's fee be paid as well. G. Art.R. Figueras. 26. Trial court’s facts showed that the required appeal bond was not filed by Atty. 309 (par. 2219 specifically mentions "quasi-delicts causing physical injuries. 1954). 1961 Facts: Ventanilla instituted this action to recover damages against his lawyer. 2219) trial court did not err in declining to award moral damages to him. 34 and 35 on the chapter on human relations (par. 32. Ventanilla claims that he suffered mental anguish upon learning that his appeal had not been perfected within the reglementary period due to the Centeno's negligence. (See Art. Art. 34 and 35 on the chapter on human relations (par. 27. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory damages.000 as nominal damages. 30. Art. Centeno had not in fact filed any appeal bond. 21. 29.000 and moral and actual damages. 2219). Atty.21. 28. AS REGARDS MORAL DAMAGES: Since the Ventanilla’s cause of action for recovery of moral damages is not predicated upon any of those specifically enumerated (under Art. 28. . No. Galang). indicates that his claim for actual or compensatory damages is highly speculative. 18833.
oppressive or malevolent manner. if the defendant acted in a wanton. AS REGARDS ATTORNEY'S FEES: .000 the appellant seeks to recover as nominal damages is excessive. and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. which has been violated or invaded by the defendant. 2221 of New Civil Code provides: Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff. . Art. it was not an assurance that the appellant would succeed in recovering the amount he had claimed in his complaint. Centeno in not depositing on time the appeal bond and filing the record on appeal within the extension period granted by the court. fraudulent. the amount of P200 awarded by the trial court to Ventanilla as nominal damages may seem exiguous. which brought about the refusal by the trial court to allow the record on appeal. Trial court did not err in not giving any. may be vindicated or recognized. 18833 had been duly perfected. 2208 of the New Civil Code. Disposition: Trial court’s judgment affirmed. NOMINAL DAMAGES: Considering the circumstances and the degree of negligence committed by Atty. Nevertheless. considering that nominal damages are not for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded.whether or not they should be adjudicated.since the Ventanilla’s claim does not fall under any of those enumerated in Art. the Ventanilla may not be compelled to satisfy it. and that even if the appeal in Civil Case No. reckless. the amount of P2.
When respondent HBI applied for a license to sell the condominium units it was required by the HLURB to submit an Affidavit of Undertaking which in effect stated that the mortgagee (SITI) of the said property to be developed agrees to release the mortgage on the said property as soon as the full purchase price of the same is paid by the buyer. on account of which respondent HBI built a condominium on the property. the Rizal Provincial Prosecutor's Office found no probable cause against Guevara and accordingly dismissed the complaint. i e .R. Thereafter. Petitioner Cometa denied that he ever executed the affidavit. When GIDC again defaulted. The trial court directed SITI to accept the offer of HBI. by improper and sinister motives. GIDC filed a case alleging that there were irregularities in the foreclosure of the mortgages. On appeal. SITI foreclosed the mortgages and it acquired the properties as the highest bidder. that in bringing the action the prosecutor acted without probable cause. 141855 February 6. 2001 Facts: Petitioner State Investment Trust. 3. For this reason. Respondent HBI submitted the required affidavit purportedly executed by Cometa as president of SITI (mortgagee). that the prosecution finally terminated in the plaintiff's acquittal.. Guevara and HBI file a complaint for malicious prosecution against Cometa and SITI. To sustain petitioners' stand that an allegation in a complaint for malicious prosecution that the information in the criminal case was filed after appropriate preliminary investigation negates a contrary allegation that the filing of the case was malicious would result in the dismissal of every . The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) found Cometa's signature to be forgery on the basis of which a complaint for falsification of public document was filed against HBI president Guevara. Ruling: A complaint for malicious prosecution sates a cause of action if it alleges — 1. Court of Appeals G. All criminal prosecutions are by direction and control of the public prosecutor. Secretary Drilon reversed the decision of the prosecutor and ordered it to file information against Guevara. The case was eventually settled through a compromise agreement. Inc. (SITI) extended loans in various amounts to Guevent Industrial Development Corp.Cometa vs. However. 2. GIDC failed to pay on the dates the loans became due. However. Its application was granted. The trial court dismissed the criminal case. respondent HBI applied to the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) for a permit to develop the property in question. the Court of Appeals affirmed the same Meanwhile. as Honeycomb Builders. that the defendant was himself the prosecutor or that at leas he instigated the prosecution. Inc. Thereafter. and 4.. No. that the prosecutor was actuated by malice. (HBI) offered to purchase from GIDC the lot covered by the agreement and the latter agreed but SITI as mortgagee refused to give its consent to the sale. Issue: Whether or not the case for malicious prosecution states a cause of action. The mere allegation in a complaint for malicious prosecution that an information was filed after preliminary investigation and that a warrant of arrest was there after issued does not by itself negate allegations in the same complaint that the prosecution was malicious. GIDC agreed to mortgage several parcels of land to SITI. A dispute later arose concerning the interpretation of the said agreement. (GIDC). On appeal.
The health officer of Obando. and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. although no actual damages resulted or none are shown. conducted the physical examination of the victim.When the accsed -appellant rape Ma. In November 1996. Likewise. 000. Dr. As has been held. The trial court convicted the accused-appellant for the crime of rape. Rufino Bautista. Luzviminda brought the victim to the Municipal Health Center of Obando. 133925 November 29. Princess Millano y San Diego an 11 year old inside the bedroom of his house after victim went from store and bought cooking oil around 10:00 am between months of May and June 1995. may be vindicated or recognized. Under Article 2221 of the Civil Code. In this case. the award of nominal damages is proper. 2000 Facts: Brgy. The victim suffered from pains in her navel which required her physical examination. An award of P2. Bautista’s findings showed that the victim’s hymen had been ruptured caused possibly by the insertion of a male organ. which has been violated or invaded by the defendant.R. whenever there has been a violation of an ascertained legal right. Bulacan was celebrating its fiesta.action for malicious prosecution. the victim’s family clearly incurred medical expenses due to the rape committed by accused-appellant. The victim revealed that she was raped by the accused-appellant. Obando. she was again molested by accused-appellant. No. The victim did not confide to her family about these incidents because she was very afraid of accusedappellant and of what her parents would do to her.00 as nominal damages is thus appropriate under the circumstances. People of the Philippines vs. also in 1995. nominal damages are adjudicated in order that the right of the plaintiff. A criminal action was filed by Luzviminda. The victim related that on two other occasions after the incident. San Pascual. Dr. the victim was ashamed and worried that her friends would spread the news regarding her unfortunate experience. Agustin Gopio G. Does the plaintiff shall be entitle for nominal damages? Ruling: Yes. Issue: . Bulacan because the latter had been experiencing pain in her navel.
the red cargo truck stopped for a while and then sped away. It appears also that he is an industrious and resourceful person with several projects in line and were it not for the incident. The court’s decision is. Inc. The employer’s liability is primary and solidary. Pleno was driving homeward with geologist Langley after an ocular inspection of the site of the Mayon Ceramics Copr. 3) P200. No. That Pleno sustained permanent deformity due to a shortened left leg and that he also suffers from double vision in his left eye is . but. 000 attorney’s fees and the cost of the suit. James Arthur Langley was sitting beside Pleno on the front seat. an award of temperate or moderate damages may still be made on loss or impairment of earning capacity.24408 for actual damages. driven by plaintiff Maximo Pleno. His actual income however has not been sufficiently established so that this Court cannot award actual damages.000 for moral damages. is the owner of a Ford Stake delivery truck. Pleno v. L-56505 May 9. The award of temperate. 2) P200.R. the Volkswagen moved faster veering to the right and smashing unto the right rear portion of another truck parked along the shoulder of the road in front of the National Manpower Building. Rivera was also brought to the hospital. was traversing the right side of the South Super Highway when it bumped and sideswiped a Volkswagen Delivery Van.5) P30. Inc. Ruben Rivera. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court but it reduced the temperate and moral damages as well as the am0unt of the attorney’s fees on the ground that the amount of P200. of course. Maximo Pleno was crushed in the driver’s seat and his leg was trapped in the wreckage. Langley was thrown outside of the truck but only suffered minor injuries. The trial court rendered a decision sentencing Philippine Paper Ruling: No. who was at that that time standing in front of his parked truck was by his own truck. Pleno suffered injuries affecting his brain causing him to act beyond normalcy at times. subject to the condition that the award for damages is not excessive under the attendant facts and circumstances. Court of Appeals G. According to the witness. Issue: Whether or not the reduction of the temperate damage is proper. On the day of the incident.000 for temperate or moderate damages. Due to the impact. 1998 Facts: The Philippine Paper Products.000.000 is rather “too high” especially considering the fact that the driver de Luna is a mere driver and defendant-appellant Corporation is only subsidiarily liable. moral and exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees lies upon the discretion of the court based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The said truck. there is no doubt that Pleno is an entrepreneur and the founder of his corporation. It was reduced to P100. Diego Orca. 4) P50. and de Luna jointly and severally liable and pay plaintiff 1) P 48.Products. The driver of the truck. driven by Florante de Luna. the Mayon Ceramics Coporation. The trial court based the amount of temperate damages awarded to the p etitioner based on the following circumstance: As to the loss of impairment of earning capacity.000 for exemplary damages. might have pushed them through.
In the case at bar. he shall be responsible for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of the obligation. Because of this. the damages recoverable are those which are the natural and probable consequences of the breach of the obligation and which the parties have foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen at the time of the constitution of the obligation. Del Rosario. According to ABS-CBN. The indemnification shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered. Court of Appeals G. The petition is granted. ABS-CBN had a right of first refusal. the meeting culminated in Del Rosario accepting ABS-CBN’s offer of P35M for 52 of the films VIVA was selling for P60M plus Maging Sino Ka Man. including Maging Sino Ka Man. In case of good faith. he suffers from some inferiority complex and is no longer active in business as well as in social life. VIVA’s proposal was P60M (P30M cash. or wanton attitude. 1999 Facts: ABS-CBN. In crimes and quasi-delict. moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees to RBS. Actual damages may likewise be recovered for loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent personal injury. one is entitled to compensation for actual damages only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. the defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. whether or not such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant. Issue: Whether or not RBS may recover damages from ABS-CBN. but also that of the profits that the obligee failed to obtain. by virtue of contract with VIVA. ABS-CBN vs. CA granted TRO but eventually dismissed ABS-CBN’s petition and made them pay for actual. ABS-CBN appealed in the CA to challenge the RTC decision. Republic Broadcasting System (RBS) bought the 104-film package which included Maging Sino Ka Man for P60M. bad faith. RBS claims actual damages based on Articles 19- . private respondent and one of VIVA representative had a meeting with Eugenio Lopez III in Tamarind Grill Restaurant. ABS asked for another list. or for injury to the plaintiff's business standing or commercial credit. and attorney’s fees to VIVA. ABS-CBN filed a case in RTC to enjoin RBS from airing 14 VIVA films. VIVA gave ABS-CBN a new list: 52 original movie titles (never before aired on TV) and 104 reruns. In contracts and quasi-contracts the damages which may be awarded are dependent on whether the obligor acted with good faith or otherwise. No.R.also established. VP for ABS-CBN Charo Santos-Concio wrote VIVA that they are not accepting the list because there were only 10 titles there that they could potentially purchase. P30M TV spots) for 52 originals and 52 reruns. If the obligor acted with fraud. saying they had quite an attractive offer to make. malice. In the meantime. RTC granted the preliminary injunction but lifted the same after RBS put up a counter bond. VIVA gave ABS-CBN three packages which consist of 36 titles to choose from. VIVA said this wasn’t their agreement and that they refuse to sell Ruling: Except as provided by law or by stipulation. In lieu of the contract. anything less the 104-movie package for P60M. There were ads in the newspapers for the airing of the movie on Channel 7. 128690 January 29. had an exclusive right to exhibit some Viva films.
temperate. The general rule is that attorney's fees cannot be recovered as part of damages because of the policy that no premium should be placed on the right to litigate. The award is not meant to enrich the complainant at the expense of the defendant. since RBS is a corporation. Articles 19-21 have at their very core the common element of malice or bad faith. or malevolent manner. or amusements that will serve to obviate the moral suffering he has undergone. oppressive. and 21 of the Civil Code. They are recoverable in criminal cases as part of the civil liability when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. for the law could not have meant to impose a penalty on the right to litigate. . and not on any legal and factual basis. liquidated. attorney's fees may be recovered as actual or compensatory damages under any of the circumstances provided for in Article 2208 of the Civil Code. of the spiritual status quo ante. and equitable justification. The SC said that ABS-CBN is not liable for lack of sufficient basis. 20. It is aimed at the restoration. experience physical suffering and mental anguish which can be experienced only by one having a nervous system. The claim of RBS against ABS-CBN is not based on contract. ATTORNEY’S FEES The law is clear that in the absence of stipulation. if the defendant acted with gross negligence. quasicontract. The claims for moral and exemplary damages can only be based on Articles 19. if the defendant acted in a wanton. RBS didn’t have to put up the counter bond. The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favour of a corporation because. being an artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation. it is damnum absque injuria. If damages result from a person's exercise of a right. it has no feelings. EXEMPLARY DAMAGES These are imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. but to enable the injured party to obtain means. MORAL DAMAGES Moral damages are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. fraudulent. Settled is the rule that the adverse result of an action does not per se make the action wrongful and subject the actor to damages. The SC said that since ABS-CBN had not posted a bond and was in fact still challenging it. no senses. therefore. RBS also claims actual damages for the advertisements for the airing of Maging Sino Ka Man. Such intentional design to do a wrongful act must be proved by evidence. legal. Even when a claimant is compelled to litigate with third persons or to incur expenses to protect his rights. in quasidelict. diversion. and in contracts and quasi-contracts. or quasi-delict.21 for the injunction for having to put up a counter bond. Here. They are not to be awarded every time a party wins a suit. The award for damages must be set aside. still attorney's fees may not be awarded where no sufficient showing of bad faith could be reflected in a party's persistence in a case other than an erroneous conviction of the righteousness of his cause. or compensatory damages. ABS-CBN was honestly convinced of the merits of its cause after it had undergone serious negotiations culminating in its formal submission of a draft contract. The preliminary injunction was lifted by RTC upon RBS paying the counter bond. and should be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. in addition to moral. delict. reckless. The power of the court to award attorney's fees under Article 2208 demands factual. no emotions. It cannot. within the limits of the possible.
000.214. 121998 March 9.000. however. Although there may be inconsistencies on minor details.00 from each accused as moral and exemplary damages. there being no legal and factual basis. Slight contradictions in fact even serve to strengthen the sincerity of the witness and prove that his testimony is not rehearsed. which she suffered as a result of her husband's death. Likewise. The absence of any generic aggravating circumstance attending the crime likewise disqualified the award of exemplary damages.R. They are safeguards against memorized perjury. but the award of P50.00 each and the amount of P23.000. the order to pay the widow of the victim P50. the eye-witness Cipriano Supero saw them killing one Pedro Torrenueva by hitting him with iron pipe while being held by the accused Florencio Pirame. though alleged in the information. as there is no showing as to when appellant and his co-accused determined to kill the victim. People of the Philippines vs. being absorbed by treachery. The widow of the victim did not testify on any mental anguish or emotional distress. 2000 Facts: Teodorico Cleopas and Florencio Pirame were both convicted by the trial court for murder.00 as civil indemnity and P23. cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstance in this case. the same do not impair the credibility of the witnesses where there is consistency in relating the principal occurrence and positive identification of the assailants. Pirame G.000 representing moral and exemplary damages and in all instances without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Issue: Whether or not the trial court erred regarding the conviction and awarding of damages . as he claims that Supero’s testimony were inconsistent and that he only volunteered to testify two months after the crime.000. And so the case was elevated to the Supreme Court. The trial court ordered to indemnify the surviving spouse of the deceased victim Pedro Torrenueva in the amount of P50. is not supported by the evidence. No.Ruling: The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the trial court.The award of P50.00 representing burial and incidental expenses and P50. improbable and unreliable.00 as moral and exemplary damages was DELETED. abuse of superior strength.00 as actual damages. The attendance of evident premeditation in the commission of the crime. it was a result of the fear that was instilled upon him upon seeing the killing with his own eyes. Pirame appealed the trial court’s decision denying his participation in the crime and alleging that the evidence against him was weak to begin with as the eyewitness’ testimony was unbelievable.214. as well as the costs was AFFIRMED. As to the delay. is unsupported. Regarding the amount of the damages awarded.
Carlos voluntarily surrendered go the police. Edgardo heard a loud thud. He was convicted of murder with the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. Issue: WON all elements of self-defense were present What are the proper damages to be rendered? Ruling: Unlawful aggression was not proven. Benito.To prove self-defense.Self-defense is a question of fact. He failed to prove that there was unlawful aggression of the Arcona vs. 2002 Facts: Carlos Arcona pleaded not guilty to a murder using the justifying circumstance of self-defense.. At around 7:30 in the evening of June 27. 134784 December 9. On the way. Napoleon suddenly drew his bolo and shouted. . and acquitted him of attempted homicide. . When he saw Edgardo rushing towards him. Carlos alleged that he was walking alone when he met Napoleon and Edgardo . Without any provocation. Both pleaded “not guilty”. "Caloy. He maintains that it was self-defense. On the other hand. I will kill you!" Napoleon swung the bolo at him twice but missed him. (2) there was lack of sufficient provocation on his part. and 10K as moral damages. someone hit Edgardo from behind with a piece of bamboo. CA affirmed the TC findings but increased civil liability to 50K. . When they were near the house of Jerry Boston. this petition. about 7 meters away.In his defense. He turned around saw Napoleon slump to the ground.Napoleon died on the way to the hospital. and (3) he employed reasonable means to prevent or repel the aggression. Edgardo ran away. Even if the prosecution is weak. 1986.R.Only Carlos appealed.Prosecution witness Leo Zaragoza testified that he was standing in front of Jerry Boston’ house. the defendant has the burden of proving that the killing was justified. Edgardo then stood up and ran towards the house of Cesar Umapas to ask for help. The doctor certified that the cause of death was the stab wound sustained at the stomach area just above the waistline. . Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines G. Benito Arcona was acquitted of homicide and convicted of attempted homicide.. the accused must show with clear and convincing evidence that:(1) he is not the unlawful aggressor. Napoleon Ong and Edgardo Talanquines were walking on their way home after coming from a birthday party. He was ordered to pay indemnity of 30k for Napoleon’s death. The element of unlawful aggression by the victim was not proven.When self-defense is invoked. the case cannot be dismissed because of the open admission of the killing. 10K for actual damages. he met his brother. Petitioner then drew out his knife and stabbed Napoleon. He saw no one in the immediate premises except petitioner. Hence. and together they proceeded to their house. Petitioner Carlos Arcona y Moban and his brother Benito Arcona y Moban were charged with Murder and Frustrated Murder in separate informations.. causing him to fall. the Court affirmed CA decision but modified the damages. he grabbed a piece of bamboo from the newly constructed culvert and hit the former on the left arm. with the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. Carlos also left the premises and went home.. No. He was made to indemnify Edgardo the sum of 10K as actual damages. when he saw petitioner stab Napoleon.TC convicted the Carlos Arcona of homicide. In this petition. Suddenly.
In cases of murder. will be recognized in court. homicide.On the other hand. Such violent death or brutal killing not only steals from the family of the deceased his precious life. civil indemnity in the amount of 50K is automatically granted to the offended party or his heirs in case of his death. “ Caloy. Although the bolo of Napoleon was unsheathed. he did not categorically say it was Napoleon.. I will kill you”. It is inherently human to suffer sorrow. . It was not possible that Carlos escaped CA was correct in increasing civil indemnity to 50K in line with existing jurisprudence. As borne out by human nature and experience. without need of further evidence other than the fact of the commission of the crime.The award of actual damages in the amount of 10K was not substantiated.part of the victim. wake or burial of the victim. Disposition petition for review is DENIED. the award of moral damages (10K) must be increased to 50K. deprives them forever of his love. parricide and rape. affection and support. When Jerry Boston testified to hearing someone say. petitioner is further ordered to pay the heirs of the deceased moral damages in the increased amount of 50KThe award of actual damages is. but often leaves them with the gnawing feeling that an injustice has been done to them. and iIt was still possible that he said it while being assaulted by Carlos. a violent death invariably and necessarily brings about emotional pain and anguish on the part of the victim’s family. it does not conclude that there was unlawful aggression. or those that appear to have been genuinely incurred in connection with the death. moral damages must be awarded even in the absence of any allegation and proof of the heirs’ emotional suffering . . The decision of CA is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Only those expenses which are duly proven. As modified. For this reason. torment. pain and anger when a loved one becomes the victim of a violent or brutal killing. It was deleted.