Cruz vs.

CA, 282 SCRA

TORTS AND DAMAGES Philippine Rabbit vs. People, GR No. 147703 (2004)
People vs. Ligon, 152 SCRA 419 (1987)
SUPPLEMENTAL COURSE OUTLINE Aquino, pp 24-26
I Sangco, pp. 115-120

2. Quasi-delict v. Breach of contract

I. CONCEPT OF TORTS; HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF
PHILIPPINE LAW ON TORTS
Articles 1170-1174, CC
Article 1174, CC
Sangco, pp. XXXI to XLV, pp. 1 to 10
Article 2178, CC
Aquino, pp. 1 to 10
Cangco vs. Manila Railroad, 38 Phil 768
II. THE CONCEPT OF QUASI-DELICT Fores vs. Miranda, 105 Phil 266
Far East vs. CA, 241 SCRA 671
A. Elements Air France vs. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155
PSBA vs. CA, 205 SCRA 729
Article 2176, CC Syquia vs. CA, 217 SCRA 624
Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607 Calalas vs. Sunga, 332 SCRA 356 (2000)
Elcano vs. Hill, 77 SCRA 98 Aquino, pp. 25-26
Cinco vs. Canonoy, 90 SCRA 369
Baksh vs. CA, 219 SCRA 115 III. NEGLIGENCE
Dulay vs. CA, 243 SCRA 220 (1995)
Garcia vs. Florido, 52 SCRA 420 A. Concept of Negligence
Andamo vs. IAC, 191 SCRA 195
Taylor vs. Manila Electric Company, 16 Phil 8 1. Definition; Elements
Tayag vs. Alcantara, 98 SCRA 723
Article 20, CC
B. Distinctions Article 1173 CC
Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil 809
1. Quasi-delict v. Delict V. Tolentino, pp. 506-507

Article 2177, CC 2. Standard of Conduct

Article 365, RPC
Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607 2.1. Ordinary prudent person
Padilla vs. CA, 129 SCRA 558

1
 Sangco, pp. 7-8
1. Burden of proof
2.2 Special Cases
Rule 131, Rules of Court (“ROC”)
Children
2. Presumption
Article 12, RPC & Comprehensive Juvenile Justice Law
Articles 2184-2185, 2188, 1734-1735, CC
Taylor vs. Manila Railroad, 16 Phil 8
Jarco Marketing vs. CA, GR No. 129792 3. Res ipsa loquitur
Del Rosario vs. Manila, 57 Phil 478
Ylarde vs. Aquino, 163 SCRA 697 Layugan vs. IAC, 167 SCRA 363
II Sangco, pp. 7-8 Ramos vs. CA, 321 SCRA 584
Batiquin vs. CA, 258 SCRA 334
DM Consunji vs. CA, 357 SCRA 249
Experts/Professionals

Article 2187,CC C. Defenses

Culion vs. Philippine, GR No. 32611
US vs. Pineda, 37 Phil 456
BPI vs. CA, 216 SCRA 51
Intoxication
Wright vs. Manila Electric, 28 Phil 122
Insanity
1. Plaintiff’s Negligence
Article 2179, CC
Manila Electric vs. Remonquillo, 99 Phil 117 GR No. L-8328 (1956)
Bernardo vs. Legaspi, 29 Phil 12
Bernal vs. House, 54 Phil 327
PLDT vs. CA, GR No 57079, 178 SCRA 94
(September 29, 1989)

Articles 2180, 2182, CC 2. Contributory Negligence

US vs. Baggay, 20 Phil 142
Articles 2179, 2214, CC
A. Degrees of Negligence Genobiagon vs. CA, 178 SCRA 422
Rakes vs. Atlantic, GR No 1719 (1907)
Article 2231, CC Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. CA, 269 SCRA 695
Marinduqe vs. Workmen’s, 99 Phil 48
3. Fortuitous Event
B. Proof of Negligence

2
 Article 1174, CC Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)
Juntilla vs. Funtanar, 136 SCRA 624 Phoenix Construction vs. IAC, 148 SCA 353 (L-652095)
Hernandez vs. COA, 179 SCRA 39 (1987)
Gotesco Investment vs. Chatto, 210 SCRA 18 Pilipinas Bank vs. CA, 234 SCRA 435 (105410) (1994)
Servando vs. Phil Steam, 117 SCRA 832 Quezon City vs. Dacara, (150304) (June 15, 2005)
National Power vs. CA, GR Nos. 103442-45 (1993)
Southeastern College vs. CA, GR No. 126389, 292
SCRA 422 (July 10, 1998)
2. Distinguished from other kinds
4. Assumption of Risk
Remote
Afialda vs. Hisole, 85 Phil 67
Gabeto vs. Araneta, 42 Phil 252 (15674) (1921)
Ilocos Norte vs. CA, 179 SCRA 5
Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)
5. Due diligence
Concurrent
Ramos vs. Pepsi, 19 SCRA 289
Metro Manila vs. CA, 223 SCRA 521
Far East Shipping vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30 (130068)
(1998)
6. Prescription
Sabido vs. Custodio, L-21512 (Aug 31, 1966)
Kramer vs. CA, 178 SCRA 518
3. Tests
Allied Banking vs. CA, 178 SCRA 526
“But for”
7. Double recovery
Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181
Article 2177, CC
Substantial Factor
IV. CAUSATION
Philippine Rabbit vs. IAC, 189 SCRA 158 (66102-04)
A. Proximate Cause
(1990)
1. Definition
Cause v. Condition
Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181(L-10126) (1957)
Phoenix vs. IAC, supra
Fernando vs. CA, 208 SCRA 714 (92087) (1992)
Manila Electric vs. Remoquillo, 99 Phil 117 (L-8328) (1956)

3
 Rodrigueza vs. Manila Railroad, (15688) (November 19, B. Things thrown or falling from a building
1921)
Article 2193, CC
B. Efficient Intervening Cause Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14

McKee vs. IAC, 211 SCRA 517 (68102) (1992) C. Death/Injuries in the course of employment
Manila Electric vs. Remoquillo, 99 Phil 117 (L-8328) (1956
Teague vs. Fernandez, 51 SCRA 181 (L-29745) (1973) Article 1711, CC cf 1712
Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988) Afable vs. Singer Sewing Machine, 58 Phil 39

C. Last Clear Chance D. Strict Liability/Product Liability

Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, p. 142
Aquino, pp. 311-329
Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil 809 Article 2187, CC
Bustamante vs. CA, 193 SCRA 603 (89880) (1991) Articles 50 –52, 97, 99, 106-107, Consumer Act
Phoenix vs. IAC, 148 SCA 353 (L-652095) (1987) Sec. 11 RA 3720
Glan vs. IAC, GR No. 70493 (May 18, 1989) Coca-cola vs. CA, 227 SCRA 293
Pantranco vs. Baesa, 179 SCRA 384 (79050-51) (1989) II Sangco, pp. 714-734
Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. CA, 269 SCRA 695,7626)
(1997) E. Interference With Contractual Relations
Ong vs. Metropolitan, 104 Phil 397 (L-7664) (1958)
Anuran vs. Buno, (L-21353) (May 20, 1966) Article 1314, CC
Raynera vs. Hiceta, 306 SCRA 102 (April 21, 1999) Gilchrist vs. Cuddy, 29 Phil 542
Canlas vs. CA, GR No 112160 (February 28 2000) So Ping Bun vs. CA, (120554) (September 21, 1999)
Consolidated Bank vs. CA, GR No 138569 (September 11, Aquino, pp. 795-801
2003)
Engada vs. CA, GR No. 140698 (June 20, 2003)
F. Liability of Local Government Units

V. LIABILITY Article 2189, CC

Guilatco vs. City of Dagupan, (61516) 171 SCRA 382

A. Possessor of Animals G. Presumption of Negligence

Article 2183, CC Articles 2185, 2188, 2190 to 2193, Civil Code

Vestil vs. IAC, 179 SCRA 47

4
VI. PERSONS LIABLE 3. Teachers and Heads of Institutions

A. The Tortfeasor Articles 218-219, FC

Articles 2176, 2181, 2194, CC
Worcester vs. Ocampo, (5932) 22 Phil 42 (1912)
Article 2184, CC
Chapman vs. Underwood, (9010) 27 Phil 374 (1914)
Caedo vs. Yu Khe Thai, G.R. No. L-20392 (Dec 18 1968)
Rodriguez Luna vs. IAC, 135 SCRA 242 (1995)
B. Vicarious Liability
Quasi-tort – Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, p.1489
Article 58 PD No. 603
Articles 216, 218- 219, 221, 236, FC
Articles 101-103, RPC
Sec. 6, RA 9344
Articles 2180 – 2182, CC
1. Parents
Exconde vs. Capuno, (L-10134) 101 Phil 843 (1957)
Salen vs. Balce, (L-14414) 107 Phil 748 (1960)
Fuellas vs. Cadano, (L-14409) 3 SCRA 361 (1961)
Gutierrez vs. Gutierrez, (34840) 56 Phil 177 (1931)
Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC, (L-62988) 135 SCRA 242
(1985)
Libi vs. IAC, (70890) 214 SCRA 16 (1990)
Tamargo vs. CA, (85044) 209 SCRA 518 (1992)
Cuadra vs. Monfort, 35 SCRA 160 (1970)
Article 2180, CC
Mercado vs. CA, (L-14342) 108 Phil 414 (1960)
Palisoc vs. Brillantes, (L-29025) 41 SCRA 548 (1971)
Amadora vs. CA, L-47745 (April 15, 1988)
Pasco vs.CFI, (L-54357) 160 SCRA 785 (1988)
Ylarde vs. Aquino, (L-33722) 163 SCRA 697 (1988)
Salvosa vs. IAC, (L-70458) 166 SCRA 274 (1988)
St Francis vs. CA, (82465) 194 SCRA 340 (1991)
PSBA vs. CA, 205 (84698) 205 SCRA 729 (1992)
Soliman vs. Tuazon, (66207) 209 SCRA 47 (1992)
St. Mary’s Academy vs. Carpitanos, (143363) (Feb 6
2002)
4. Owners and Managers of Establishments
Philippine Rabbit vs. Phil American, (L-25142) 63
SCRA 231 (1975)
5. Employers
Philtranco vs. CA, (120553) 273 SCRA 562 (1997)
Castilex vs. Vasquez, G.R. No. 132266 (Dec 211999)
Filamer vs. IAC, (75112) 212 SCRA 637 (1992)
NPC vs. CA, (119121) 294 SCRA 209 (1998)
Light Rail Transit vs. Navidad, (145804) 397 SCRA
75(2003)
Mckee vs. IAC, (68102) 211 SCRA 517 (1992)
Valenzuela vs. CA, (115024) 253 SCRA 303 (1996)

2. Guardians 6. State

Articles 216 and 218, Family Code Merrit vs. Government, (11154) 34 Phil 311 (1916)
Articles 2180-2181, CC Rosete vs. Auditor General, (L-1120) 81 Phil 453
(1948)
Mendoza vs. De Leon, (9596) 33 Phil 508 (1916)

5
 Fontanilla vs. Maliaman, (55963) 194 SCRA 486 Delfin Lim vs. Ponce de Leon, G.R. No. L-22554 (1975)
(1991) Aberca vs. Ver, G.R. No. L-69866 (1988)
Article 2189, CC MHP Garments vs. CA, 236 SCRA 227
City of Manila vs. Teotico, (L-23052) 22 SCRA 267
(1968) B. Defamation, Fraud, Physical Injuries
Republic vs. Palacio, 23 SCRA 899
Article 33, CC
A. Others Articles 353-359, RPC
Marcia vs. CA, 205 Phil 147
Article 1723, CC Madeja vs. Caro, 211 Phil 469
Arafiles vs. Phil Journalists, GR No 135306 (2004)
1. Proprietors of Buildings
1. Defamation
Articles 2190- 2192, CC
MVRS vs. Islamic, GR No 135306, 396 SCRA 210
2. Employees (January 28, 2003)
Araneta vs. Joya, (L-25172) 57 SCRA 59 (1974)
2. Fraud
3. Engineer/Architect
Salta vs. De Veyra, 202 Phil 527
B. Nature of Liability: Joint or Solidary?
3. Physical Injuries
Lanuzo vs. Ping and Mendoza, 100 SCRA 205 (1980)
Malipol vs. Tan, 55 SCRA 202 (1974) Capuno vs. Pepsi Cola, G.R. No. L-19331 (1965)
Viluan vs. CA, 17 SCRA 742 Corpus vs. Paje, G.R. No. L-26737 (1969)
Madeja vs. Caro, supra
Dulay vs. CA, GR No 108017 (1995)
VII. TORTS WITH INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION
C. Neglect of Duty
A. Violation of Civil and Political Rights
Article 34, CC
Article 32, CC
1 Sangco, pp. 228-255 (1993) D. Action for damages where no in independent civil action
is provided

6
 Constantino vs. Medez, GR No 5722 (1992)
Article 35, CC Quimiguing vs. Icao, 34 SCRA 132
Pe vs. Pe, GR No. L-17396 (1962)

VIII. INTENTIONAL TORTS b. Malicious prosecution

A. Abuse of Rights Article 2219, CC

Aquino, pp. 384-391
Article 19, CC Lao vs. CA, 325 SCRA 694
Velayo vs. Shell, 100 Phil 186 Que vs. IAC, 169 SCRA 137
Saudi Arabia vs. CA, 297 SCRA 469 Drilon vs. CA, 270 SCRA 211
Globe Mackay vs. CA, 176 SCRA 778
Albenson vs. CA, G.R. No. 88694. January 11, 1993.
Amonoy vs. Gutierrez, 351 SCRA 731 c. Public Humiliation
UE vs. Jader, 325 SCRA 804 GR No 132344 (2000)
Garciano vs. CA, 212 SCRA 436 Patricio vs. Leviste, G.R. No. 51832 (1989)
Barons Marketing vs.CA, 286 SCRA 96 Grand Union vs. Espino, G.R. No. L-48250
BPI vs. CA, 296 SCRA 260 (1979)

d. Unjust Dismissal
B. Acts contra bonus mores
Singapore Airlines vs. Paño, 122 SCRA 671
Article 21, CC (1983)
Medina vs. Castro-Bartolome, G.R. No. L-
1. Elements 59825 (1982) 116 SCRA 597

Ruiz vs. Secretary, GR No. L-15526 (1963)

IX. OTHER TORTS
1. Examples
A. Dereliction of Duty
a. Breach of promise to marry, Seduction and
Article 27, CC
Sexual Assault
Amaro vs. Samanguit, L-14986 July 31, 1962
Wassmer vs. Velez, 12 SCRA 648
B. Unfair Competition
Tanjanco vs. Santos, GR No L-18630 (1966)
Bunag vs. CA, 211 SCRA 441
Article 28, CC

7
 C. Violation of Human Dignity and Privacy b. Extent

Article 26, CC Articles 2201-2202, CC

St Louis vs. CA, GR No. L-46061 (1984), 133 SCRA 179
(November 14, 1984) c. Certainty
Concepcion vs. CA, GR No. 120706 (2000), 324 SCRA 85
(January 31, 2000) DBP vs. CA, GR No. 118367 (1998)
Fuentes vs.CA, 323 Phil 508 (1996)
X. DAMAGES
d. Damage to property
A. Definition and Concept
PNOC vs.CA, supra
Aquino, pp. 842-843
e. Personal Injury and Death
People vs. Ballesteros, 285 SCRA 438
Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483
Article 2206, CC
Articles 2195, 2197, CC
Ramos vs. CA, G.R. No. 124354 (1999), 380
Heirs of Borlado vs. CA, G.R. 114118 (2001), 363 SCRA 753
SCRA 467 (April 11, 2002)
Lazatin vs. Twano, 2 SCRA 842 (1961)
Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203 SCRA 126
Damnum Absque Injuria
f. Attorney’s Fees
Aquino, pp. 843-845
Board of Liquidators vs. Heirs of Kalaw, 20 SCRA 987
Article 2208, CC
Custodio vs. CA, supra
Quirante vs. IAC, G.R. No. 73886, 169 SCRA
769 (January 31, 1989)
B. Kinds of Damages
g. Interest
1. Actual or Compensatory
Articles 2209-2213, CC
Articles 2216, 2199, 2200, 205, CCCrismina Garments vs. CA, G.R. No. 128721,
Algarra vs. Sandejas, 27 Phil 284 304 SCRA 356 (March 9, 1991)

a. Kinds h. Mitigation of Liability

PNOC vs. CA, 297 SCRA 402 Articles 2203-2204, 2214, 2215
Integrated Packing vs. CA, 333 SCRA 170

8
 Cerrano vs. Tan, 38 Phil 392
People vs. Pirame, 327 SCRA (2000)
2. Moral Carlos Arcona y Moban vs. CA, GR No
134784, 393 SCRA 524 (Dec. 9, 2002)
a. Concept
d. Factors in determining amount
Article 2217, CC
Kierulf vs. CA, 269 SCRA 433 PNB vs. CA, 266 SCRA 136
Fule vs. CA, 286 SCRA 698
b. Proof and Proximate Cause Philippine Airlines vs. CA, 275 SCRA 621
Valenzuela vs. CA, supra
Miranda-Ribaya vs. Carbonell, 95 SCRA 672 Sumalpong vs. CA, 268 SCRA 764
Del Rosario vs. CA, 267 SCRA 58 Lopez vs. Pan American, 16 SCRA 431
Raagas vs. Traya, 22 SCRA 839 Producer’s Bank vs. CA, GR No 111584, 365
Enervida vs. dela Torre, 55 SCRA 339 SCRA 326 (Sept.17, 2001)
People vs. Bagayong, GR. No 126518, 299
SCRA 528 (Dec. 2, 1998) e. Who may recover

c. Cases where allowed Strebel vs. Figueros, 96 Phil 321

ABS-CBN vs. CA, G.R. No. 128690, 301 SCRA
Articles 2219-2220, CC 572 (Jan. 21, 1999)
Francisco vs. GSIS, 7 SCRA 577 National Power vs. Philipp Brothers, G.R. No
Expert Travel vs. CA, G.R. No. 130030 (1999) 126204, 369 SCRA 629 (Nov. 20, 2001)

i. Unfounded Suits 3. Nominal

Mijares vs. CA, 271 SCRA 558 Articles 2221-2223, CC

De la Pena vs. CA, 231 SCRA 456 Ventanilla vs. Centeno, 1 SCRA 215
J Marketing vs. Sia, 285 SCRA 580 Robes-Francisco vs. CFI, 86 SCRA 59
Cometa vs. CA, 301 SCRA 459 People vs. Gopio, 346 SCRA 408
Armovit vs. CA, 184 SCRA 476
ii. Labor Cases
4. Temperate
Triple Eight vs. NLRC, 299 SCRA 608
Articles 2224-2225, CC
iii. Taking of Life Pleno vs. CA, G.R. No. 56505 (1988)
People vs. Singh, 360 SCRA 404

9
 People vs. Plazo, 350 SCRA 433, 161 SCRA 208 (May
9, 1988)

5. Liquidated

Articles 2226-2228, CC

6. Exemplary or Corrective

Articles 2229-2235, CC
PNB vs. CA, 256 SCRA 44
Del Rosario vs. CA, 267 SCRA 158

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

SANGCO, CESAR J. Philippine Law on Torts and Damages, Rev. Ed.,

Quezon City, JMC Press Vol. 1 (1993), Vol. II (1994)

TOLENTINO, ARTURO Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil Code

of the Philippines Vols. I, IV and V, Quezon City

CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (CC)

FAMILY CODE (FC)

REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC)

10