Case Doctrines Damages

ACTUAL DAMAGES

MERALCO v. Atty. Pablito M. Moral damages are awarded to compensate the claimant for physical suffering, mental anguish, fright,
Castillo serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar
injury

Actual damages are compensation for an injury that will put the injured party in the position where it was
before the injury. They pertain to such injuries or losses that are actually sustained and susceptible of
measurement. Basic is the rule that to recover actual damages, not only must the amount of loss be capable
of proof; it must also be actually proven with a reasonable degree of certainty premised upon competent
proof or the best evidence obtainable.

Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but must be duly proved with a reasonable degree of
certainty. The award is dependent upon competent proof of the damage suffered and the actual amount
thereof. The award must be based on the evidence presented, not on the personal knowledge of the court;
and certainly not on flimsy, remote, speculative and unsubstantial proof.

Nonetheless, in the absence of competent proof on the amount of actual damages suffered, a party is
entitled to temperate damages. The amount thereof is usually left to the discretion of the courts but the same
should be reasonable.
Victory Liner, Inc. v. As a rule, documentary evidence should be presented to substantiate the claim for damages for loss of
Gammad earning capacity. By way of exception, damages for loss of earning capacity may be awarded despite the
absence of documentary evidence when (1) the deceased is self-employed earning less than the minimum
wage under current labor laws, and judicial notice may be taken of the fact that in the deceased's line of
work no documentary evidence is available; or (2) the deceased is employed as a daily wage worker
earning less than the minimum wage under current labor.
 (Earning capacity should be substantiated by the required documentary proof.)

However, the fact of loss having been established, temperate damages in the amount of P500,000.00 should
be awarded to respondents. Under Article 2224 of the Civil Code, temperate or moderate damages, which
are more than nominal but less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when the court finds that
some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount can not, from the nature of the case, be proved with
certainty.
People v. Gambao, G.R. No. We take this opportunity to increase the amounts of indemnity and damages, where, as in this case, the
172707, October 1, 2013 penalty for the crime committed is death which, however, cannot be imposed because of the provisions of
R.A. No. 9346:75

1. ₱100,000.00 as civil indemnity;

2. ₱100,000.00 as moral damages which the victim is assumed to have suffered and thus needs no
proof; and

3. ₱100,000.00 as exemplary damages to set an example for the public good.

The entire amount of the civil liabilities should be apportioned among all those who cooperated in the
commission of the crime according to the degrees of their liability, respective responsibilities and actual
participation. Hence, each principal accused-appellant should shoulder a greater share in the total amount
of indemnity and damages than Perpenian who was adjudged as only an accomplice
 For backwages, it will be computed from the date of illegal dismissal until the date of the decision of the
Nacar v. Gallery Frames, Labor Arbiter.
G.R. No. 189871, August
13, 2013 Anent the issue of award of interest in the form of actual or compensatory damages, the Supreme Court
ruled that the old case of Eastern Shipping Lines vs CA is already modified by the promulgation of the
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetary Board Resolution No. 796 which lowered the legal rate of interest
from 12% to 6%.

Non-Monetary Obligations (such as the case at bar)

a. If already liquidated, rate of interest shall be 6% per annum, demandable from date of judicial or extra-
judicial demand (Art. 1169, Civil Code) b. If unliquidated, no interest Except: When later on established
with certainty. Interest shall still be 6% per annum demandable from the date of judgment because such on
such date, it is already deemed that the amount of damages is already ascertained
Geluz vs CA, G.R. No. L-
16439, July 20, 1961
The Supreme Court believed that the minimum award fixed at P3,000 for the death of a person. It does not
cover cases of an unborn fetus that is not endowed with personality which the trial court and Court of
Appeals predicated.

Since an action for pecuniary damages on account of personal injury or death pertains primarily to the one
injured, it is easy to see that if no action for such damages could be instituted on behalf of the unborn child
on account of the injuries it received, no such right of action could deliberately accrue to its parents or
heirs.

In fact, even if a cause of action did accrue on behalf of the unborn child, the same was extinguished by its
pre-natal death, since no transmission to anyone can take place from one that lacked juridical personality

MORAL DAMAGES
Simex International
(Manila), Incorporated v.
Court of Appeals G.R.
No.88013, March 19, 1990
Iglecerio Mahinay vs Atty.
Gabino Velasquez, Jr., G.R.
No. 152753- January 13,
2004
Filipinas Broadcasting
Network v. Ago Medical and
Educational Center, G.R.
No. 141994, January 17,
under Article 40 of the Civil Code, which expressly limits such provisional personality by imposing the
condition that the child should be subsequently alive
We shall recognize that the petitioner did suffer injury because of the private respondent’s negligence
that caused the dishonor of the checks issued by it. The immediate consequence was that its prestige was
impaired because of the bouncing checks and confidence in it as a reliable debtor was diminished.
In the case at bar, it is obvious that the respondent bank was remiss in that duty and violated that
relationship. What is especially deplorable is that, having been informed of its error in not crediting the
deposit in question to the petitioner, the respondent bank did not immediately correct it but did so only
one week later or twenty-three days after the deposit was made
In order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering,
mental anguish, fright and the like.
While respondent alleged in his complaint that he suffered mental anguish, serious anxiety, wounded
feelings and moral... shock, he failed to prove them during the trial. Indeed, respondent should have taken
the witness stand and should have testified on the mental anguish, serious anxiety, wounded feelings and
other emotional and mental suffering he purportedly suffered to sustain his claim for... moral damages. 
Mere allegations do not suffice; they must be substantiated by clear and convincing proof.  No other person
could have proven such damages except the respondent himself as they were extremely personal to him.
Yes, A juridical person is generally not entitled to moral damages because, unlike a natural person, it
cannot experience physical suffering or such sentiments as wounded feelings, serious anxiety, mental
anguish or moral shock. However, the Court’s statement in Mambulao that “a corporation may have a
good reputation which, if besmirched, may also be a ground for the award of moral damages”
 2005
Ramon Tan v. Court of
Appeals
Sulpicio Lines, Inc., v.
Curso, G.R. No. 157009,
March 17, 2010
AMEC’s claim for moral damages falls under item 7 of Article 2219 of the Civil Code. This provision
expressly authorizes the recovery of moral damages in cases of libel, slander or any other form of
defamation. Article 2219(7) does not qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or juridical person.
Therefore, a juridical person such as a corporation can validly complain for libel or any other form of
defamation and claim for moral damages. Moreover, where the broadcast is libelous per se, the law
implies damages.
We hold that petitioner has the right to recover moral damages even if the bank's negligence may not have
been attended with malice and bad faith.
While petitioner was not in bad faith, its negligence caused the private respondent to suffer mental anguish,
serious anxiety, embarrassment and humiliation, for which he is entitled to recover, reasonable moral
damages
For moral damages, the brothers and sisters of Dr. Curso are not entitled thereto due to the legislative intent
to exclude them from the recovery of moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the
deceased, as can be seen from the omission of brothers and sisters from Article 2206 (3) of the Civil Code.
Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius.
Article 2206 of the Civil Code entitles the descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, and surviving
spouse of the deceased passenger to demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of
the deceased.

Nominal Damages

Seven Brothers Shipping Temperate or moderate damages may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss
Corporation v. DMC has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be provided with certainty.
Construction Resources,
Inc., G.R. No. 193914. The amount of temperate damages to be  
awarded is usually left to the discretion
November 26, 2014 of the courts, but such amount must be
reasonable.

Consequently, in computing the amount of temperate or moderate damages, it is usually left to the discretion of
the courts, but the amount must be reasonable, bearing in mind that temperate damages should be more than
nominal but less than compensatory.
Robert Da Jose and Article 2206 of the Civil Code, the heirs of the victim are entitled to indemnity for loss of earning capacity.
Francisco Ocampo v. Compensation of this nature is awarded not for loss of earnings, but for loss of capacity to earn money. The
Celerina Angeles G.R. No. indemnification for loss of earning capacity partakes of the nature of actual damages which must be duly
187899, October 23, 2013 proven by competent proof and the best obtainable evidence thereof. Thus, as a rule, documentary evidence
should be presented to substantiate the claim for damages for loss of earning capacity.

Now, while it is true that respondents submitted cash vouchers to prove Eduardo’s income, it is lamentable
as duly observed by the RTC that the officers and/or employees who prepared, checked or approved the
same were not presented on the witness stand.

Except for the award for the loss of earning capacity, the Court concurs with the findings of the CA and
sustains the other awards made in so far as they are in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.

Temperate or Moderate Damages

People v. Gutierrez, G.R. We ruled that temperate and actual damages are mutually exclusive in that both may not be awarded at
No. 188602, February 4, the same time. Hence, no temperate damages may be awarded if actual damages have already been
2010 granted. The award of ₱10,000.00 as temperate damages must, therefore, be deleted.

. In murder, the grant of civil indemnity, which has been fixed by jurisprudence at ₱50,000.00, requires no
proof other than the fact of death as a result of the crime and proof of the accused's responsibility
therefor. Moral damages, on the other hand, are awarded in view of the violent death of the victim. There is
no need for any allegation or proof of the emotional sufferings of the heirs.

Likewise, the award of exemplary damages is warranted when the commission of the offense is attended
by an aggravating circumstance
People v. Dacillo et. al., In addition, the Court awards P25,000 in temperate damages, said amount being awarded in homicide or
G.R. No. 149368, April 14, murder cases when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court.
2004

D. Liquidated Damages
Azcuna v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 116665, March 20, Can damages other than fair rental value of property be claimed in ejectment case?
1996
YES. In ejectment cases, damages recovered are those equivalent to reasonable compensation for the use
and occupation of the premises. This also includes damage previously agreed to by lessee in the lease
contract and imposed by lessor by way of damages.

Additional damages and charges other than fair rental value of property and liquidated damages cannot be
claimed in ejectment.

This is clearly an agreement for liquidated damages — entitling private respondent to claim a stipulated
amount by way of damages (correctly totalling P3,000.00 per day as there were three (3) units being leased
by petitioner) over and above other damages still legally due him, i.e., the fair rental value for the use and
occupation of the property as provided for in Section 8, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court.

Filinvest Land, Inc. v. Court As a general rule, courts are not at liberty to ignore the freedom of the parties to agree on such terms and
of Appeals, G.R. No. conditions as they see fit as long as they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or
138980, September 20, 2005 public policy. The judge shall equitably reduce the penalty when the principal obligation has been partly or
irregularly complied with by the debtor.

EXN: Unconscionable and iniquitous

Even if there has been no performance, the penalty may also be reduced by the courts if it is iniquitous or
unconscionable (Art.1229, NCC). A penalty interest of P15,000.00 per day of delay as liquidated damages
or P3,990,000.00 (representing 32% penalty of the P12,470,000.00 contract price) is unconscionable
considering that the construction was already not far from completion.
Exemplary or Corrective Damages

METROBANK v. BA Article 2231 of the Civil Code, which provides that in quasi-delict, exemplary damages may be granted if
Finance Corporation, G.R. the defendant acted with gross negligence, thus applies.
No. 179952, December 04,
2009
For "gross negligence" implies a want or absence of or failure to exercise even slight care or diligence, or
the entire absence of care, evincing a thoughtless disregard of consequences without exerting any effort to
avoid them.

The law allows the grant of exemplary damages to set an example for the public good. The business of a
bank is affected with public interest; thus it makes a sworn profession of diligence and meticulousness in
giving irreproachable service. For this reason, the bank should guard against in injury attributable to
negligence or bad faith on its part. The award of exemplary damages is proper as a warning to [the
petitioner] and all concerned not to recklessly disregard their obligation to exercise the highest and strictest
diligence in serving their depositors.

People v. Dalisay, G.R. No. Nevertheless, People v. Catubig laid down the principle that courts may still award exemplary damages
188106, November 25, 2009 based on the aforementioned Article 2230, even if the aggravating circumstance has not been alleged, so
long as it has been proven, in criminal cases instituted before the effectivity of the Revised Rules which
remained pending thereafter.

one awarding exemplary damages, even if an aggravating circumstance attending the commission of the
crime had not been sufficiently alleged but was consequently proven in the light of Catubig; and another
awarding exemplary damages only if an aggravating circumstance has both been alleged and proven
following the Revised Rules.