. PEOPLE vs. VILLAR G.R. No. 202708. April 13, 2015.

FACTS:

Alvaro Suitos, Wilson Suitos, and Victoriano Villar were found guilty for the murder of Jesus
Ylarde and were ordered to solidarily pay the heirs of the victim the sum of P11,575.00 as actual
damages, P320,000.00 for loss of earnings of the victim, P50,000.00 for death indemnity, and
P50,000.00 for moral damages. In determining the loss of earning capacity of Ylarde who was 49
years old at the time of his death, the formula for life expectancy adopted in Davila v. CA: 2/3 x
(80-49) = life expectancy of 20 years is used. This figure is multiplied by the annual net income
of the deceased (P16,000), equivalent to P320,000 to fix the amount of loss of earning capacity.

ISSUE:

WON the award for damages is correct. (PARTLY)

RULING:

The Court finds the award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 correct. However, the
award of civil indemnity was increased to P75,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence.
Moreover, the heirs of the deceased are entitled to an award of exemplary damages in the amount
of P30,000.00. The award of actual damages in the amount of P11,575.00 must also be modified.
As held in People v. Villanueva, “when actual damages proven by receipts during the trial
amount to less than P25,000.00, the award of temperate damages of P25,000.00 is justified in
lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount.” Thus, in lieu of P11,575.00 as actual damages, the
Court grants P25,000.00 as temperate damages. In addition, all damages awarded shall earn
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.
Furthermore, the RTC and the CA erred in the award of loss of earning capacity. It is already
settled jurisprudence that the formula that has gained acceptance over time has limited recovery
to net earning capacity; i.e., less the necessary expense for his own living. Here, the indemnity
for lost earnings was erroneously computed as the computation for lost income of P16,000.00 did
not take into consideration the deceased’s necessary expenses. Moreover, it is settled that to
justify an award of actual damages, there must be competent proof of the actual amount of loss.
Credence can be given only to claims which are duly supported by receipts. By way of
exception, damages for loss of earning capacity may be awarded in two instances: 1) the victim
was self-employed and receiving less than the minimum wage under the current laws and no
documentary evidence is available in the decedent’s line of business; and 2) the deceased was
employed as a daily wage worker and receiving less than the minimum wage. Here, the award
for loss of earning capacity lacks basis. For one, the widow of the deceased gave conflicting
testimonies. At first, she testified that her husband “has a net income of P16,000.00 a year as
farmer, sari-sari store owner, driver and operator of two tricycles and caretaker of Hacienda
Bancod.” Next, she claimed that “before his death, her husband earns P50.00 a day as tricycle
driver and P150.00 from their sari-sari store and had a net income of P4,000.00 a month. As a
farmer her husband produces 270 cavans of palay a year with a price of P135.00 a cavan
weighing 50 kilos.” Aside from giving inconsistent statements, the amounts mentioned were
arbitrary and were not proved to be below the prescribed minimum wage. Plainly, this case does
not fall under any of the exceptions exempting the submission of documentary proof. Hence, the
award of loss of earning capacity must be deleted for lack of basis. Judgement affirmed with
modifications. ▪ The award for loss of earning capacity is deleted for lack of basis; ▪ The award
of civil indemnity is increased to P75,000.00; ▪ Appellant is ordered to pay exemplary damages
in the amount of P30,000.00; ▪ The award of actual damages is deleted; in lieu thereof, temperate
damages in the amount of P25,000.00 is awarded; and ▪ All damages awarded shall earn interest
at the rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.