ELCANO V HILL

(77 SCRA 98)

“CIVIL LIABILITY FROM QUASI DELICTS VS CIVIL LIABILITY FROM CRIMES”

“CULPA AQUILIANA OF A MARRIED MINOR”

Plaintiffs-Appellants: PEDRO ELCANO and PATRICIA ELCANO, in their capacity as

Ascendants of Agapito Elcano, deceased

Defendants- Appellees : REGINALD HILL, minor, and MARVIN HILL, as father and
Natural Guardian of said minor,

FACTS:

 Reginald Hill, a married minor but living with his father, Marvin Hill whom
was accused for the death of Agapito Elcano (son of Sps. Elcano).

 Sps. Elcano filled a criminal case but Hill was subsequently acquitted on the
ground that his act was not considered criminal because of “lack of intent to
kill, coupled with mistake.”

 Sps. Elcano then filed a civil action against Hill and his father for damages

 The Hills filed a Motion to Dismiss, on the grounds that the action is barred
by a prior judgment which is now final and or in res-adjudicata and that he is
relieved as guardian of his son through the reason of emancipation of
marriage hence his civil liability has been extinguished.

ISSUES:
1. W/N the Civil action for damages should be barred by the acquittal of criminal
action
2. W/N the Article 2180 of the Civil Code can be applied to Atty. Marvin Hill even
though Reginald is already married

HELD:

1. NO, the acquittal of Reginal Hill in the criminal case has not extinguished his
liability for quasi-delict, hence that acquittal is not a bar to the instant action
against him.

Separate individuality of a cuasi-delito or culpa aquiliana, under the Civil Code

has been fully and clearly recognized, even with regard to a negligent act for which the
wrongdoer could have been prosecuted and convicted in a criminal case and for which,
after such a conviction, he could have been sued for this civil liability arising from his
crime.

Mark John Ramos | OBLIBATIONS AND CONTRACTS

 According to ART. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the
preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from
negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the
same act or omission of the defendant. In reiteration of Garcia, that culpa
aquiliana includes voluntary and negligent acts which may be punishable by law

2. Yes, Article 2180 is applicable to Atty. Marvin Hill.

Under Article 2180, "(T)he obligation imposed by article 2176 is demandable not
only for one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is
responsible. The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are
responsible. The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are
responsible for the damages caused by the minor children who live in their company."

In the instant case, it is not controverted that Reginald, although married, was
living with his father and getting subsistence from him at the time of the occurrence in
question. Factually, therefore, Reginald was still subservient to and dependent on his
father, a situation which is not unusual.

Therefore, Article 2180 is applicable to Atty. Marvin Hill, however the SC ruled
since at the time of the decision , Reginald is already of age, Atty. Marvin Hill’s liability
should be subsidiary only as a matter of equity.

Mark John Ramos | OBLIBATIONS AND CONTRACTS