Damages (Assessment of Damages and jurisdiction)

People v Catubig
Facts:
On November 27, 1997, DannilynCatubig and her four younger siblings were watching
television on the sala of their house. Her father, Danilo Catubig, arrived and told
Dannilyn’s siblings to proceed to her aunt’s house. Thereafter, Danilo told Dannilyn to
go inside a room and lie down on the bed. The former then removed the latter’s shorts
and panty and removed his brief and tshirt and laid on top of Dannilyn who was not able
to resist, afraid of Danilo who beat and raped her in the past.
Dannilyn’s aunt got suspicious, thus, she told to Dannilyn’s mother Jocelyn, about the
suspicion. Dannilyn was then forced to reveal that she was indeed raped which was
then reported to the police station. Dannilyn was examined and was found out that the
laceration in her hymen was caused by sexual intercourse.
In the Information, Danilo was charged with rape. Danilo, however, denied the
accusation, stating that the charge was brought about because of the ill-will between
him and Jocelyn and a quarrel with Dannilyn.
The trial court then rendered a decision holding Danilo guilty of rape, wherein he was
sentenced with death penalty and payment of moral damages to Dannilyn. With the
imposition of death penalty, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic
review.
Issue:
Was the imposition of death penalty proper considering the fact that the information was
defective for the commission of the crime?
Ruling:
Death penalty was not proper. The Supreme Court finds merit because the concurrence
of the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender are special qualifying
circumstances that are needed to be alleged in the complaint or information for the
penalty of death to be decreed. The Constitution guarantees to be inviolable the right of
an accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.  It is a
requirement that renders it essential for every element of the offense with which he is
charged to be properly alleged in the complaint or information.
In this case, the information failed to state the minority of Dannilyn and her relationship
with Danilo as her father which are both qualifying circumstances to impose death
penalty.
About the award of damages, the trial court correctly awarded moral damages, an
award that rests on the jural foundation that the crime of rape necessarily brings with it
shame, mental anguish, besmirched reputation, moral shock and social humiliation to
the offended party. In addition, compensatory and exemplar damages were necessary.
Further, the attendance of aggravating circumstances in the perpetration of the crime
serves to increase the penalty (the criminal liability aspect), as well as to justify an
award of exemplary or corrective damages (the civil liability aspect), moored on the
greater perversity of the offender manifested in the commission of the felony.
Exemplary or corrective damages are intended to serve as a deterrent to serious wrong
doings, and as a vindication of undue sufferings and wanton invasion of the rights of an
injured or a punishment for those guilty of outrageous conduct.