Ninth week
a. Discuss Articles 2190, 2191, and 2192
in relation to Art. 1723?
Article 2190. The proprietor of a building
or structure is responsible for the damages
resulting from its total or partial collapse, if
it should be due to the lack of necessary
repairs. (1907)
Article 2191. Proprietors shall also be
responsible for damages caused:
(1) By the explosion of machinery
which has not been taken care of
with due diligence, and the
inflammation of explosive
substances which have not been
kept in a safe and adequate place;
(2) By excessive smoke, which
may be harmful to persons or
property;
(3) By the falling of trees situated
at or near highways or lanes, if not
caused by force majeure;
(4) By emanations from tubes,
canals, sewers or deposits of
infectious matter, constructed
without precautions suitable to
the place. (1908)
NOTE: emanation- perceptible thing that
issues or originates from a source.
Article 2192. If damage referred to in the
two preceding articles should be the result
of any defect in the construction mentioned
in article 1723, the third person suffering
damages may proceed only against the
engineer or architect or contractor in
accordance with said article, within the
period therein fixed. (1909)
Article 1723. The engineer or architect
who drew up the plans and specifications
for a building is liable for damages if within
fifteen years from the completion of the
structure, the same should collapse by
reason of a defect in those plans and
specifications, or due to the defects in
the ground. The contractor is likewise
responsible for the damages if the edifice
falls, within the same period, on account of
defects in the construction or the use of
materials of inferior quality furnished by
him, or due to any violation of the terms
of the contract. If the engineer or
architect supervises the construction, he
shall be solidarily liable with the
contractor.
Acceptance of the building, after
completion, does not imply waiver of any
of the cause of action by reason of any
defect mentioned in the preceding
paragraph.
The action must be brought within ten
years following the collapse of the
building. (n)
NOTE: edifice - building or structure
Applicability of Article 2190 and 2191
A building or structure, due to lack of
necessary repairs collapsed and caused
harm. Collapse should be total or partial.
Either case, owner or proprietor shall be
responsible for the damage or injury
caused.
NOTE: if force majeure or defect in the
construction under Article 1723, owner is
not responsible for the resulting damage or
injury.
NOTE: Doctrine of Last Clear Chance is not
applicable to buildings. Proprietor is still
liable for damages even if he warned the
persons injured because he due to the lack
of necessary repairs. (De Roy vs. CA)
Supplement of Article 2190
 Article 482. If a building, wall,
column, or any other construction is in
danger of falling, the owner shall be
obliged to demolish it or to execute
the necessary work in order to prevent
it from falling.
If the proprietor does not comply with
this obligation, the administrative
authorities may order the demolition of
the structure at the expense of the
owner, or take measures to insure
public safety. (389a)
Presumption of Negligence in Article
2191
If any of the 4 enumerated events occurred,
proprietor, not necessarily of the owner, is
presumed negligent. He has to overcome
the presumption with sufficient evidence to
avoid responsibility.
Excessive Smoke
Article 682. Every building or piece
of land is subject to the easement
which prohibits the proprietor or
possessor from committing
nuisance through noise, jarring,
offensive odor, smoke, heat, dust,
water, glare and other causes.
Falling Trees
Article 483. Whenever a large tree
threatens to fall in such a way as to
cause damage to the land or
tenement of another or to travelers
over a public or private road, the
owner of the tree shall be obliged
to fell and remove it; and should he
not do so, it shall be done at his
expense by order of the
administrative authorities. (390a)
Harmful Emanations
The proprietor shall be liable for the
damage unless the defect in the
construction is covered by Article
1723, in which it is the contractor,
engineer or architect, who made
the same will be liable.
Remedy
Injunction is an available remedy for any
affected party because the damage may be
irreparable.
Defect in the Construction
If the building or structure referred to in
Article 2190 and 2191 were constructed
with substantial defects are the cause of the
damage or injury, the injured party may
proceed only against the engineer or
architect or contractor in accordance with
Article 1723.
NOTE: In lease and usufruct, if by reason of
the sole negligence of the lessee or
usufructuary, then he is liable. If the owner
of the property is also negligent, both will be
liable.
Lessee must immediately notify the
proprietor of the need to make necessary
repairs on the property. Otherwise, he will
be liable to the proprietor for the damages
caused and suffered by the latter.
Rules on liability for collapse of a
building (NCC, Art. 1723)
1. The collapse of the building must be
within 15 years from the completion
of the structure.
NOTE: The collapse is by reason of
a defect in the engineer or
architect’s plans and specifications,
or due to the defects in the ground
2. The prescriptive period is 10 years
following the collapse.
3. The liability applies to collapse or
ruin, not to minor defects.
 4. Even if payment has been made, an
action is still possible.
NOTE: Acceptance of the building,
after completion, does not imply
waiver of any of the cause of action
by reason of any defect.
5. If the engineer or architect
supervises the construction, he shall
be solidarily liable with the
contractor.
NOTE: The contractor is likewise
responsible for the damages if the
edifice falls, within the same period,
on account of defects in the
construction or the use of materials
of inferior quality furnished by him,
or due to any violation of the terms
of the contract.
When a building collapses during an
earthquake
GR: No one can be held liable in view of the
fortuitous event if the proximate cause of
the collapse of the building is an
earthquake.
XPN: If the proximate cause is the defective
designing or construction, or directly
attributable to the use of inferior or unsafe
material, it is clear that liability exists (NCC,
Art. 1723; Juan F. Nakpil & Sons v. CA,
G.R. No. L-47851, October 3, 1986).
a.1.Discuss De Roy v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 80718, 29 January 1988.
a.2.Discuss Nakpil & Sons v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. L-47851, October 3,
1986.
b.What is the principle of created risks?
Principle of Created Risks
When a person introduces in society a
dangerous object from necessity or profit,
he exposes others to danger. If it injures
another even without negligence on the part
of the owner or proprietor, he should be
liable for the damaged caused.
Ex: X bought a lot for his chemical business,
but it deposited dangerous deposits in the
canals. Even assuming X is without
negligence, he has the appropriate permits
or he does not know that there were
dangerous deposits in the canals, he is still
liable for damage it caused to those people
affected.
c.What is the principle of presumed
negligence?
Principle of Presumed Negligence
When an inanimate object causes damage
to another the owner thereof becomes
liable; proof of fault or negligence is
unnecessary because this is presumed.
Article 2191 is based on this principle.
1. Article 1756, NCC - In case of death
or injuries of passengers, common
carriers are presumed to have been
at fault or acted negligently, unless
they prove that they observed
extraordinary diligence prescribed in
Articles 1733 and 1755 of the NCC.
Note: Negligence is proven by (1) Direct
evidence, (2) Circumstantial evidence and
(3) Res Ipsa Loquitur
d.What is Article 2193?
Article 2193. The head of a family that lives
in a building or a part thereof, is responsible
for damages caused by things thrown or
falling from the same. (1910)
Head of family- usually the father; in the
absence, the mother. Single person if he is
the one supporting his family.
Even if he had nothing to do with the
occasioning of the damages, he is co-
responsible with the actual tortfeasor.
It is imputed liability in nature and solidary in
consequence. If he paid for the damages,
he may recover from the actual tortfeasor.
In default of the parents or a judicially
appointed guardian, parental authority shall
be exercised by the following persons in the
order indicated:
1. Surviving grandparents;
2. Oldest sibling, over 21 years old
unless unfit or unqualified; or
3. Child’s actual custodian, over 21
years old unless unfit or disqualified
(FC, Art. 216).
e.What is the nature of liability under Art.
2193?
Both absolute and exclusive.
Absolute- as long he is the head of the
family that lives in the building or part
thereof, he is liable even if he is not present
at the time of the incident.
Note: Without making the liability absolute,
for the lack of the identification of the
tortfeasor the victim cannot recover
damages for his injuries which is unfair.
Exclusive- only the head of the family who
is made liable.
f.What are the purposes of the
absoluteness of Article 2193?
1. To compel the head of the family to
see to it that no dangerous things
are placed on the window sills and
other parts of the dwelling place
which may be thrown or fall by
accident.
2. To compel him to supervise the
members of the family or guests
from doing acts or activities which
may result in the throwing or falling
of things from their house or place of
dwelling
3. To relieve the victim of the difficult
burden of identifying the persons
who caused the throwing or falling of
the injurious thing.
g.What is Article 2194?
Article 2194. The responsibility of two or
more persons who are liable for quasi-delict
is solidary. (n)
Joint Tortfeasors
Two or more persons who act together in
committing a wrong, or contribute to its
commission, or assist or participate therein
actively and with common intent, so that
injury results to a third person from the joint
wrongful act of the wrongdoers (De Leon,
2012).
The term “joint tortfeasors’’ include all
persons who com-mand, instigate, promote,
encourage, advice, countenance, co-
operate in, aid or abet the commission of a
tort, who approve of it after it is done for
their benefit.
Requirements:
1. Only one quasi-delict
2. 2 or more persons must have
participated in the commission of the
single quasi-delict
3. Injury must be indivisible
Test for Joint Tortfeasors
Whether the plaintiff has a single cause of
action against such tortfeasors, or whether
he has only several causes of action against
each of them.
Concurrent Negligence of Two or More
Persons
Where the concurrent or successive
negligent acts or omissions of two or more
persons, although acting independently, are
in combination the direct and proximate
cause of a single injury to a third person
(Sabido v. Custodio, G.R. No. L-21512,
August 31, 1966).
If several persons jointly commit a tort, the
plaintiff or person injured, has his election to
sue all or some of the parties jointly, or one
of them separately, because the tort is in its
nature a separate act of each individual
(Dean Worcester v. Ocampo, G.R. No.
5932, February 27, 1912).
In case of injury to a passenger due to the
negligence of the driver of the bus on which
he was riding and of the driver of another
vehicle, the drivers as well as the owners of
the two vehicles are jointly and severally
liable for damages (Tiu v. Arriesgado, G.R.
No. 138060, September 1, 2004).
i.1.Discuss PNCC v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 159270, August 22, 2005.
i.2.Discuss Chan, Jr. v. Iglesia ni Cristo,
G.R. No. 160283, October 14, 2005.
i.3. Discuss Sps. Pereña v. Sps. Zarate,
G.R. No. 157917, August 29, 2012.
j.What is Article 2195?
Article 2195. The provisions of this Title
shall be respectively applicable to all
obligations mentioned in article 1157.
k.What is damage?
Damage
The loss, hurt, or harm which results from
the injury.
Injury
The illegal invasion of a legal right.
Damages
the compensation awarded for the damage
suffered.
l.Discuss the applicability of Article 2195
to Article 1157?
Article 1157. Obligations arise from:
(1) Law; (2) Contracts; (3) Quasi-
contracts; (4) Acts or omissions
punished by law; and (5) Quasi-
delicts. (1089a)
Damages may be imposed on all obligations
arising in Article 1157.
Note: Those who in the performance of their
obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or
delay and those in any manner contravene
the tenor thereof are liable for damages
(Article 1170).
The delay in the performance of obligation
must be either malicious or negligent to
recover.
m. What is Article 2196?
Article 2196. The rules under this Title are
without prejudice to special provisions on
damages formulated elsewhere in this
Code. Compensation for workmen and
other employees in case of death, injury or
illness is regulated by special laws. Rules
governing damages laid down in other laws
shall be observed insofar as they are not in
conflict with this Code.
Conflict between Civil Code and special
laws, CC prevails insofar as issues of
damages are concerned.
Special laws- Compensation for workmen
and other employees in case of death, injury
or illness
Note: Labor Arbiters or NLRC can decide
claim for damages arising from Er-Ee
relationship. Labor Arbiter has jurisdiction to
award not only the reliefs produced by the
labor laws but also damages governed by
the Civil Code (like termination, illegal
dismissal. (Article 217, RA 6715)
RTC- action for damages but said court has
no jurisdiction to issue TRO in labor cases.
Doubt exists between the evidences of Er
and Ee, in favor of the Ee
Moral damages are recoverable where the
dismissal of the Ee was attended by bad
faith or fraud or constituted an act
oppressive to labor or was done in manner
contrary to morals, good customs or public
policy.
Any award of MD by the labor arbiter cannot
be based on labor code but should be
grounded on the civil code.
Where Er-Ee relationship is merely
incidental
Regular courts have jurisdiction over actions
for damages where the Er-Ee relationship is
merely incidental and the cause of action
proceeds from a different source of
obligation, such as where the damages
claimed were based on tort, malicious
prosecution, or breach of contract, or when
the claimant seeks to recover a debt from a
former employee or seeks liquidated
damages for enforcement of a prior
employment contract.
n. What are the kinds of damages
generally recoverable?
Article 2197. Damages may be:
(1) Actual or compensatory;
(2) Moral;
(3) Nominal;
(4) Temperate or moderate;
(5) Liquidated; or
(6) Exemplary or corrective.
Damages is a pecuniary compensation,
recompense, or satisfaction for an injury
sustained, or, as otherwise expressed, the
pecuniary consequences which the law
imposes for the breach of some duty or
violation of some rights.
Note: Damages, generally speaking, are of
two (2) kinds: compensation damages and
punitive (exemplary or corrective) damages.
Aims of the law on Damages
The underlying basis for the award of tort
and damages is the premise that an
individual was injured in contemplation of
law. Awarding of damages is intended to
repair the damages done by putting the
plaintiff in the same position as far as
pecuniary compensation can do.
Damages can only be paid with money
Damages can only be paid with money and
not “palay” because “palay” is not a legal
tender currency in the Philippines (Vda.
Simeon Borlado v. CA, G.R. No. 114118,
August 28, 2001).
NOTE: In actions for damages, the courts
should award an amount to the winning
party and not its equivalent in property
(Ibid.).
o. What is Article 2198?
Article 2198. The principles of the general
law on damages are hereby adopted insofar
as they are not inconsistent with this Code.
Note: in case of conflict, it is the Civil Code
that prevails.