TORTS & DAMAGES

Section 3E

COURSE SYLLABUS:
FUNDAMENTAL TOPICS & CASES

PART I
(TORTS)

I. General Consideration
a. TORTS
i. History
ii. Definition
iii. Under Philippine Law
iv. Definition under Philippine Law
• Naguiat vs NLRC, GR 116123, March 13, 1997
v. Elements
• Garcia vs Salvador, 518 SCRA 568
vi. Culpa Aquiliana vs Culpa Criminal vs Culpa Contractual

II. QUASI-DELICT
a. Historical Background
• Barredo vs Garcia, 73 Phil 607
b. Definition
• Picart vs Smith, GR L-12219, March 15, 1918
• Cusi, et al vs PNR, GR L-29889, May 31, 1979
• Jarco Mktg. vs CA, 321 SCRA 377
• Child Learning vs Tagorio, 426 SCRA 236
c. Degrees of Negligence
• Ilao-Oretar vs Ronquillo, 535 SCRA 633
• Amado vs Rio, 95 Phil 33
d. Standard of Conduct
i. General Rule
• Picart vs Smith, supra
• Sicam vs Jorge, GR 159617, August 8, 2007
• Corinthian Gardens vs Sps. Tanjuangco, GR 160795,
June 27, 2008
ii. Special Circumstances
• Hrs. of Completo vs Albayada, GR 172200, July 6,
2010
• Pacis vs Morales, GR 169467, Feb. 25, 2010
iii. Children
• Taylor vs Manila Railroad, 16 Phil 8
• Jarco Mktg., supra

1
 iv. Experts
• Culion vs Philippines, 55 Phil 129
e. Negligence as Proximate Cause
i. Definition
• Vda. De Bataclan vs Medina, GR L-10126, Oct. 22,
1957
• Phoenix Construction vs IAC, GR 65295, March 10,
1987
• Fernando vs CA, GR 92087, May 8, 1992
• Benguet Elec. Vs CA, GR 127326, Dec. 23, 1999
ii. The “Cause”
*Proximate
• Mercury Drug vs Baking, GR 156037, May 25, 2007
• Pilipinas Bank vs CA, GR 105410, July 25, 1994
*Concurrent
• Far Eastern vs CA, GR 130068, Oct. 1, 1998
*Remote
• Gabeto vs Araneta, 42 Phil 252
• Manila Elec. Vs Remoquillo, 99 Phil 117
*Intervening
• Phoenix Construction, supra
f. Proof of Negligence
• PLDT vs CA, GR 57079, Sept. 29, 1989
g. Presumption of Negligence
i. Res Ipsa Loquitur
• Africa vs Caltex, GR L-12986, March 31, 1966
• F.F. Cruz vs CA, GR 52732, Aug. 29, 1988
• D.M. Consunji vs CA, GR 137873, April 20, 2001
• Capili vs Sps. Cardana, GR 157906, Nov. 2, 2006
ii. Respondeat Superior
• Castilex vs Vasquez, GR 132266, Dec. 21, 1999
iii. Violation of Traffic Rules (Arts. 2184-85)
• US vs Crane, GR 10181, March 2, 1915
• BLTB vs IAC, GR 74387-90, Nov. 14, 1988
• Guillang vs Bedania, GR 118889, March 23, 1998
iv. Possession of Dangerous Weapons and Substances (Art.
2188)

III. DEFENSES AGAINST CHARGE OF NEGLIGENCE

a. Plaintiff’s Negligence is the PROXIMATE CAUSE
• Bernardo vs Legaspi, 29 Phil 12
• PLDT vs CA, GR 57079, Sept. 29, 1989
• Manila Elec. Vs Remoquillo, supra

2
 b. Contributory Negligence (Art. 2179)
• Rakes vs Atlantic Gulf, GR L-1719, January 23, 1907
• Taylor vs Manila Electric & Railroad, GR 4977,
March 22, 1910
• Cadiente vs Macas, GR 161946, Nov. 14, 2008
*Limitations on Contributory Negligence
• Last Clear Chance
o Picart vs Smith, supra
o Lapanday vs Angala, 525 SCRA 229
• Attractive Nuisance
o Hidalgo vs Balandan, 91 Phil 488
o Taylor, supra
• Res Ipsa Loquitur
o Capili, supra
c. Assumption of Risk
• Afialda vs Hisole, GR L-2075, Nov. 29, 1949
d. Last Clear Chance
• Picart vs Smith, supra
• Sps. Ong vs MWD, GR L-7664, Aug. 29, 1958
• Glan Peoples Lumber vs IAC, GR 70493, May 18,
1989
• Pantranco vs Baesa, GR 79050-51, Nov. 14, 1989
e. Prescription (Art 1146)
• Ferrer vs Ericta, GR L-41767, Aug. 23, 1978
• Kramer vs CA, GR 83524, Oct. 13, 1989
f. Fortuitous Event (Art. 1174)
• Hernandez vs COA, GR. 71871, Nov. 6, 1989
• Southeastern College vs CA, GR L-87584
g. Exercise of Diligence (Art. 2180)
h. Mistake and Waiver
• Gatchalian vs CA, GR 56487, Oct. 21, 1991
i. Damnum Absque Injuria
• NAPOCOR vs CA, GR 96410, July 3, 1992
j. Emergency Rule
• McKee vs IAC, 211 SCRA 519
k. Volenti Non-Fit Injuria
• INERCO vs CA, 179 SCRA 5

IV. VICARIOUS LIABILITY (Art. 2180)

a. PARENTS & GUARDIANS
• Exconde vs Capuno, GR L-10134, June 29, 1957
• Elcano vs Hill, GR L-24803, May 26, 1977
• Bahia vs Litonjua, 30 Phil 624

3
 • Tamargo vs CA, GR 85044, June 3, 1992
• Sps. Libi vs IAC, GR 70890, Sept. 18, 1992
b. OWNERS & MANAGERS of ESTABLISHMENTS
• Cangco vs Manila Railroad, 38 Phil 768
• Phil. Rabbit vs American Forwarders, 63 SCRA 231
• Fil Broadcasting vs AMEC, 448 SCRA vs 435
• Filamer vs IAC, 212 SCRA 637
• Jayme vs Apostol, GR 163609, Nov. 27, 2008
• Mercury Drug vs Sps Huang, GR 172122, June 22,
2007
c. STATE
• Meritt vs Gov’t, 34 Phil 311
• Rosete vs Auditor-General, 81 Phil 453
• Fontanillas vs Maliamanm, GR 55963, Dec. 1, 1989 &
Feb. 27, 1991 (MFR)
• NIA vs Fontanilla, 179 SCRA 685
d. TEACHERS & HEADS of ACADEMIC ESTABLISHMENTS
• Amadora vs CA, GR L-47745, April 15, 1988
• Palisoc vs Brillantes, GR L-29025, Oct. 4, 1971
• St. Mary’s vs Capistranos, 376 SCRA 473
• St. Francis vs CA, GR 82465, Feb. 25, 1991
• PSBA vs CA, GR 84698, Feb. 4, 1992

V. PRIMARY/STRICT LIABILITY
a. POSSESSORS & OWNERS OF ANIMALS (Art. 2183)
• Vestil vs IAC, 179 SCRA 48
• Afialda vs Hisole, supra.
b. OWNERS of MOTOR VEHICLES (Art. 2184)
• Caedo vs Yu Khe Thai, GR L-20392, 26 SCRA 410
• Carticiano vs Nuval, 341 SCRA 264
• Mallari vs CA, 324 SCRA 147
c. MANUFACTURERS & PROCESSORS (Art. 2187)
d. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (Art. 2189) (2sec. 24, RA 7160)
• Guilatco vs City of Dagupan, 171 SCRA 382
• City of Manila vs Teotico, GR L-23052, Jan. 29, 1968
• Jimenez vs City of Manila, GR 71049, May 29, 1987
• Mun. of San Juan vs CA, GR 121920, Aug. 9, 2005
e. BUILDING PROPRIETORS (Art. 2190-2193)
• De Roy vs CA, 157 SCRA 757
• Dingcong vs Canaan, 72 Phil 14
f. ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS (Art 2192 and 1723)

4
VI. KINDRED TORTS/MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
• Batiquin vs CA, GR 118231, July 5, 1996
• Ramos vs CA, GR 124354, Dec. 29, 1999
• Ramos vs CA, April 11, 2002 (MFR)
• Reyes vs Sisters of Mercy, GR 130547, Oct. 3, 2000
• Nograles vs CMC, GR 142625, Dec. 19, 2006
• PSI vs Agana, GR Nos. 126297, 126467, 127590, Feb.
11, 2008

VII. SPECIAL TORTS IN HUMAN RELATIONS

a. ABUSE of RIGHTS (Art. 19)
• Carpio vs. Valmonte, 438 SCRA 38
• Sea Comm’l. Vs. CA, 319 SCRA 211
• Citytrust Banking vs. Villanueva, 361 SCRA 446
• Nikko Hotel Manila Garden vs. Reyes, 452 SCRA 532
b. ACTS & OMISSIONS CONTRARY TO MORALS (Arts. 20-21)
• Ruiz vs. Sec. of Nat’l Defense, 9 SCRA 925
• Tenchavez vs. Escano, 122 Phil 752
• Pe vs. Pe, 115 SCRA 186
• Wassmer vs. Velez, 120 Phil 1440
c. UNJUST ENRICHMENT (Arts. 22-23)
• Perez vs. Pomar, 2 Phil 682
• Pacific Merchandising vs. Consolacion Insurance, 73
SCRA 564
• CIR vs. Friedman’s Fund Ins., 148 SCRA 316
• Velayo vs Shell, 100 Phil 186
d. JUDICIAL VIGILANCE (Art. 24)
e. THOUGHTLESS EXTRAVAGANCE (Art. 25)
f. RIGHT TO PRIVACY (Art. 26)
• St. Louis Realty vs CA, GR L-46061, Nov. 14, 1984
• Castro vs People, GR 180832, July 23, 2008
g. DERELICTION of DUTY (Art. 27)
• Pilar vs SB, 128 SCRA 173
• Phil. Match vs City of Cebu, GR L-30745, Jan. 18, 1978
h. UNFAIR COMPETITION (Art. 28)
• US vs Manuel, 7 Phil 221
i. Art. 29
• Sapira vs CA, 314 SCRA 370
• Sadio vs RTC of Antique, 201 SCRA 744
• Machinery & Eng’g. Supplies vs Quintano, 98 Phil
893
• Santos vs Pizarro, 465 SCRA 222
j. Art. 31

5
 • Republic vs Bello, 120 SCRA 203
• Tayag vs. Alcantara, 98 SCRA 723
k. VIOLATION of CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS (Art. 32)
• Aberca vs Ver, 160 SCRA 590

VIII. NUISANCE
• Velasco vs. Meralco, 40 SCRA 342
• Meralco vs. CA, 114 SCRA 173
• Bengson vs. Pangasinan, 62 Phil 816
• HOA of El Deposito vs. Lood, 47 SCRA 174
• Solis vs. Pujeda, 42 Phil 699
• Ramcar vs. Milar, 116 Phil 825
• Timoner vs. People, 125 SCRA 830

PART II
(DAMAGES)

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
a. Definition
b. Concept
c. Distinguished from Damage, Injury
d. Purpose
e. Kinds
• MEA Builders vs CA 450 S 155
• Aznar vs Citibank 519 S 287
• Robleza vs CA 174 S 354

II. ACTUAL / COMPENSATORY (Arts. 2199-2215)

• Hicks vs Manila Hotel, 28 SCRA 235

• Marikina Auto Line vs Pp, 486 SCRA 284
• RCPI vs CA, 103 SCRA 359
• Pp vs Sanchez, 367 SCRA 520
• Cariaga vs Laguna, Tayabas Bus, 110 SCRA 346
• Uy Chaco vs Admiral Line, 46 Phil 418
• Lemoine vs Alkan, 33 Phil 162
• Junio vs Mla. Railroad 58 P 176
• Pp vs Gutierrez, Jr., 302 SCRA 667
• Quirante vs IAC, 169 SCRA 770
• Royal Traders Employee Union vs NLRC, 269 SCRA 733
• Reformina vs Tomol 139 SCRA 260
• Eastern Shipping vs CA, 234 SCRA 78
• Phil Accident Insurance vs Flores, 97 SCRA 811
• Hulst vs PR Builders, 532 SCRA 74

6
 III. OTHER KINDS

a. MORAL (Arts. 2217-2220)

• R& B Surety vs IAC, 129 SCRA 736
• Guita vs CA, 139 SCRA 576
• UCPB vs Ramos, 415 SCRA 596
• Expertravel & Tours vs CA, 309 SCRA 141
• Pp vs Fontanilla, 23 SCRA 1229
• Pp vs Banela, 301 SCRA 84
• Figueroa vs Pp, 498 SCRA 298
• Equitable Banking vs IAC, 133 SCRA 135

b. NOMINAL (Arts. 2221- 2223)

• Algarra vs Sandejas, 27 Phil 284
• San Miguel Brewery vs Magno
• SSS vs CA, 120 SCRA 707
• Business Services of the Future vs CA, 480 SCRA 571

c. TEMPERATE /MODERATE (Arts. 2224-2225)

• GSIS vs Labung-Deang, 365 SCRA 341
• Tanay Recreation Center vs Fausto, 455 SCRA 436
• LBC Express vs Ado, 468 SCRA 216
• Pp. vs Duban, 412 SCRA 131

d. LIQUIDATED (Arts. 2226-2228)

• Menchaves vs Tevez, 449 SCRA 380
• Joe’s Electric Supply vs Alto Electronics, 104 Phil 333
• Lirag Textile Mills vs SSS, 153 SCRA 338

e. EXEMPLARY / CORRECTIVE (Arts. 2229-2235)

• Octot vs Ybanez, GR L-48643, Jan. 18, 1992
• De Leon vs CA, GR L-31931, Aug. 1988
• Pp vs Cristobal, GR 116279, Jan. 29, 1996

References:

TORTS AND DAMAGES by Timoteo B. Aquino

NOTES ON TORTS & DAMAGES by Judge Alicia Gonzalez-Decano