Chapter Xt ‘SPECIAL CONTRACTS ‘The author has chosen tp cover only the contracts discussed ln this chapter on sconust of thew useflneas end importance in thay-teday He. Every day, contrasts ef snl, agency. parnership, lea, pledge, mortguge and transportation are usualy heard and ‘nonuered no ly by levers but also by laynnen. Iti thereire Important far a beginner inthe study ef law to havo basie and ‘working kemladge of the abevemontioned contracts by way cf ‘reparing thom oa deoper and more dteied stu of aw. 1 sate [BEFITON OF A CONTRACT OF SALE scones wharthy one of ihe erating Sermin ng anne ster tay retire pre eas inten or tx enue rt 1998, NCO) ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ACONTRAGT OF SALE ‘The essential clement of a centrectof sale are a follows: cope: csc. © = Consent 8 — Subject matter © = Case 1. Consenter meeting ofthe minda—tho vendor gross tosll ‘and transior ovnersip of his property vo dhe vende in return {rte price theater agrees to pay the vendor 2. Subject matter —the subject mater ofthe entract must be specie Ifthe partes Rave not azroed onthe subject mater of ‘hele waasecdoa, thy have no meeting ofthe minds sendin conrmacrs 3. Cause or consideration — Tae pre may be i the form of ‘mongy or its equivalent, os etaed in the eat sextence of Art 488. Therefore, a contract of sale ay ether be oval ort wring FORM OF ACONTRAGT OF SALE Nopartcular form is neadad to make contre of eal veld as eoween the partes. For sslong i athe exential rust for its vallity are present, a conteee of se shall be vlid an cater, roganilss ofits form. Therafre, a contract of sale may either bo ‘oral orin wring However, there aze contracts of sale wish must bein writing ikea ele of a “pion af land or any inteest therein,” ot sale of personal property ifthe pies PSO 00 er more ar sale wich wll ‘be performed only ater the peried of more than one your frm the ‘eveutton ofthe agreement. BoM the flown ail fhe New Csi Cade provi ae fellows “Art 1874, When a sale ofa piece of and or aay interest thersn is through aa egont, author ofthe latter ‘hallten writing otherwise shall be wei The following contracts sre unenforseabe, thay are raid 1. ‘Thone entered into the nsme of another person Dy one who ‘hes been given ro authority oF legal prosentaton, or who has ast bayend his powers, 2. Thove that do zotcomply with he State of Frauds ot forth this antec IaUhe ellowing ease, 2 Sgreement hereafter modo shall be wnchforecbl by Sc. unlessthesane,erssmenotoor memorenda, thereot be in wag, ad subserbed ty the pany sharged, or by his agen; evddence, therefore, othe ‘agreemert eset be received without the wing, ‘ra secondary eidenon of te conto (@) An agreement dha by ite Yrs i not to be performed within « yoar fem the making hers ©) A specal promise to answer for the deb, dlefator ascarlage a atte:(0 An agreement. made in consideration of marriage, other than a mutual premise to @)Anmogroement for tho sale of goods, chattals or things in ction, ct prise mot las than five hundred pesos (P5000), less the buyer faxopt and receive part of sich mds and hate th evidences, some ef he Sudh dings in ection, or pey atthe time ome [rt of tho purshoos money, bat when « sale Imada hy scion and entry ix mado by the ‘netines mie eles Book, at he time af he Sa, of the amount and kind of property sl, {terms of tale, price, aames ofthe purchasers person wheao acount the alos modo, is ufident memorandums (0) Anagrecment-fer the leasing fr Jonge pend than one yar, ot fr the ale of reel propery oan interes herein © A preventation ss to credit fa third person. 3. Thoas where both partve are ineapable of giving convent to aeontract™ [BRIEF DISCUSSION OF THE ESSENTIAL REQUISITES, CONSENT — A contro uf ale is perfovtod atthe memaent there isa meeting ssid and thoreore ie porfotod by mere ‘cnsont Dalivry of paymont i not sane foe the perfects of 8 amtract of ae the contract an pon tha pie. (Art. 1475, Je! por) EXAMPLES: 4. When A sells hitcar to Band dhe are fring each other ‘rhea B agreed to pay P1O.00900, the pros eakod by [the contract of asl is perfected fom the momoat A accepted te offer of B unetnaiticnaly 2 Aplaced an sdvertisoment in a nowspaper to sel his car. yan interested buyer eae ly telephone and tal him, son se {at he is amenable to pay the peed asked by A without condition Prem that moment, there sa pesfested entre tia, 3. A.wrote leer to B and otere oa sel his ear to im. Upen receipt ofsaidloiter, B wrote letter reply aceating the efor of A end which letter war resid by Am Fabeusny 1, 2002 ai 7.00 pm. Bebe rseving th etiee, however, Avwrote eter te Bandinforsied hm thot bois Witharayinghisor. Here, thane ie no pefeted contract Psa because pice t Une dite ed tine A received Bs letler aceptence, he bad already. withdrawn bls offer ‘fore ho Know ofthe seveptance, Therefore, there is me meeting the minds SUBJECT MATTER ~ The suinct mater of the contract of slo must be opeie or dotermiaete, act generico indeterminate [As soa stated in tho lst chap, a pectic thingia a hing whi can be designated with parielary, ‘otare things may be the object of sole provided they are alway in existence at the ine ef prfoton of Ue contrac REQUISITES OF AVALIO SUBJECT MATTER 1. Thesubjet matter munt be specific or determina 2 Thesjoet maar most be lf. 8. The seller must hee the right to transfor the ownership ‘thereof at Us dime of delivery, (CAUSE OR CONSIDERATION — Wiehout a laf cause ot consideration te contract a sale vie Tha nse in contract of fale i pice erin, in mony cit elven. ‘OBLIGATIONS OF THE SELLER ‘Theprincipal sbligations ofthe walla ae a fllewes To deliver the dsterminste objet of the contracts ‘Totranafe its ommerehip, ‘To wncrant gains eviction and gine hidden defects ‘To pay forthe expenae of the doed of vale; nd ‘Te prosorvo tho thing from the moment perfection wp to the time af dlivers.OBLIGATIONS OF THE BUYER ‘The principal sbligations ofthe buyer are a fliome: 1, Toacept deliver and 2 ‘Topey the price ~ atthe time snd place stipulated inthe 1 AGENCY DeFNTON Acticle 1868 of the New Cin] Code defines agency axa ccotroct inbereky perse binds himself i render some service oF le do Temething in roprecoattion of or ia behalf of aneUnor with tho onsen oF authority ofthe lator, In Ralloe». Go Chan & Sone Roalty Corporation tel, OR. No 1.24899, Jan 3, 1078, agency was dfined as “a relationship between two” parties wherely one party called the principal, samhories another, called the agent, at for and an his behalf in ‘ansactns with third persons Article 1868 gives the impression thatthe agent must slays expressly represent the principal. This, of ours, not necossary {rue for there are cases whet the agent acts tx behalf o hmselt {and yet the principal woul fill bund sach wx when the contract Involves things belonging tothe principal WHEN IS A CONTRACT OF AGENCY PERFECTED? Agency ia perfctd bythe meeting ofthe offer and acceptance ‘upon the thing ard the cause which are to censtute tho exnirat, (dr. 1318, NCC) Acceptance must be made exprssly or impliedly. Te may be Aplin from the ats ofthe agen, rom Mis slencn and from ‘nection according to Ue ereumsianons. (Ar. 1870, ACCEPTANCE OF AGENCY BETWEEN PERSONS WHO ARE PRESENT AND BETWEEN PERSONS WHO ARE ABSENT 1. Between persons who are present — Tho aoveptance of = person may alo be impliod if te principal delivers hus power St atorey to the agent sd the laitr receives wathone any hectic. 2. Between persone who are absent — The acceptance of te ‘agency cannet be implied frm Ue silence the agent sep (8) When the principal trananita his poms af sttomey te the Agent, wap reetes i ethoat any grt. (6) When the principal entrust to him by ltr or tlegram ‘power of atloray with expt to tho bases in whidh he ishahitually engaged at an agent, and he did net opp {othe Iter or tlegram. [BASIC PRINCIPLES OF AGENCY (1) Teas the fellewing charcteiti: (2) Teis consensual, biatra, wominst, princi, an proparatary toconsact, () 1 6 censanaval hecwe Ht ie porated by mero consent exeopt when it inolven the tale of land fr eny ntarest therein. Iti Hlatoral boost the brincipal end the agen: hive reciprocal ebligneions 1 by nominate because @ contrast of agency preparatory ta subsequent contact (2) The appeintsant of an og by the orinipal i heed on trast. Tharafore, th agont in expected to tt within tho sage ofhis anthony snd toa behalf of bis principal (9 As alroady oxplained ebevo, a sitation may arse when the agent is thorized by tho principal tt he ate in behalf of himself Ts also posle thst tho agent not sulhoriaed but he aes in behalf of his principal. Beceuse ‘rte posi, th folowing tution may are, (a) The agent acte with authority and in behalf of the prineipad — The transactiyn is valid aad the [ritipalis bound hy tho acta ct the agent The agent ‘ovurnee no porsonal Habits ualos dalibraely nnd hima. (©) Theagent ie authorized bythe principal ut he ‘acts in behelf of himuelf not in behalf of the Principal! Ar re, the prciel ie nos bound by the aes ofthe agent except i twats ings Ieionging tothe penal (©) The agent acte without authority but in behalf ofthe principal ~"Thetransaction a unenfreoehl> bie ft may be vated. If rated, to contrac i vallate fram the very betrning.ae BemDoUCTIONTO LAW @) Theagentocte without axthorityandin hixown behalf — The transaction is valid, whether or no re subject matiersbelongst the principal provided thatthe agent can legally transfer the ownership of he thing at the tne of delivery, Otherwise, he will, Ihe ld able for avon OBLIGATIONS OF AN AGENT Art. 1881, "Toast within th seope of his authority Art 1884. "Tocarry out the agency and ba liable for damages in cage of nonpertemanee; and to fnish the business aliwady gran on the death of tho rincpal, should delay ental any danger ‘Art 1886. To advance necessary funds, istipusted, except ifprinipal is insolvent Art. 1887. "Tosact in scentdance with the instructions of the principe in defvut there, be sll all ht {bed father of a god family would do, a roquizod Dy the nature ofthe business). ‘Ar. 1866. Nov cary oul the agency fits execution ‘wold mame rest ne age to the Pricpa. ‘Art 1889, To be liele for damages if there being a confit Datween his interests and that of the principal, he prefers is own. ‘Art 1901. "To render an account of his transaction and to deliver to the principal whatever he may have ‘roccived by virtue of the agoney even though it ‘may not be ving to the principal (stipulation ceempting the agent fiom this obligotion is vor OBLIGATIONS OF THE PRINCIPAL (FROM Ars. 1810, 1912, and +913) ‘CODE: CARE © = Comply A= Advance R — Rainbune 1 = Indemnity cua a ‘Art 1910, To comply with all the obligations which the agent may have contracied within the supe of his authority. ‘Art 1912, Te advance to agent, iflaier requests (Lt por.) sumsmecescary t execute the agency. ‘To reimburse the agent forall savarees he (2ne per) made, even iFbasineas was aot oaccasfsl red thatthe sgrnt i re fom fat ‘Art 1913. "Toindemnify the agent forall danvages which the ceecotion of agency may have caved the agent ‘without his oui oF negigence CASES WHEN PRINCIPAL IS NOT LIABLE FOR EXPENSES INCURRED BY AGENT ‘Article 1918 provides as lows: 1. Af tho agent contravenes instructions of the principal ‘unless the later wishes to avail imeclf cf the benefit derived trom the contract: 2. When oxpansas wars duets the fait of the agents 3. When the agent incurred them knowing thet anfayoreble result would ensue, iftheprineipal Was aware thereat fond 4. When otipulated that the agent bears the expenses or ‘that theagent bears the expenses, r that the agent weuld De allowed enly «certain sum. IMPORTANT ARTICLES TO REMEMBER ‘Art. 1919, When two persons contra wit regard t the seme ‘hing one with the agent and tho cther withthe prnsipel, end the twe contracts are incompatible with each other, that ef priar cate ‘hall ke prefered, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 154, ‘Art. 64. If the same thing should have been soi to diferent vende, the ownerdhip shal be transfored to the porsor whe may have first taken possession thereck im good fit, if should be ‘movable property ‘Should it be immevable property, the ownership shall belong vo the person sogulrag I whe in good flsh rat rewoedl i in the Registry of Property‘Should thers be no inscription, the ownership shall pertain to the person who in good faith was fs inthe possessed, nthe hse Ueret tothe person who pessos the odes tl, pevidd eres good falc, PREFERENCE: LTP PROPHEETY 1 MOVABLE 3) To dhe sc poser in gon ft 2. IPTHEPROPERTY 1 IMMOVABLE (a) To thofiret rgitrant in goed faith; (G) Th the Geet gonmer in good faith, if therein po snerptons ond (©) To the posseaur who reproventa the odes til, hero so fs: epistant cna at possasorin gd fh, ‘CODE: RPO 1 — Rogistront in good talib 1 ~ Posscoor in god faith 0 ~ Oldest MIL PARTNERSHIP. DERNTION. By the cantrat of partnerhip, two (2) or more persons bid AGemeelre io contribute money. property or idasiry Yo a common, fue, wich the intention of dividing the profs among themselves. aay tls be firmed to execs a peseeton (Ar. 1707, NCC) BASIC PRINGIPLES TO REMEMBER. 1 Parterip is based om MUTUAL TRUST hy or aang ‘the partnrs. (delete personarum) 2 Like a eargortion, it hat'a porsonaty sparats and isting pom th niidaal partes. (At 1768, NCO) 3. Thapartneremay ontnibute money, property oF nds tos commen fund 4. AL partnorhip may bo conetitted in any form except ‘whore immevehl property er ral right ro contbutod ene 1 thereto, in which case, a public instrument shall be ‘ectsanry (dre 1771, NCC) 5. A contract of potncrsip is vid, whenever immovable property i cntebuted there, fas iarentory of eid Droperty is ao made, signed by Uae partes, and attoced (othe publi asirument. (Art. 2775) NECESSARY FORMALITIES IN CREATING A PARTNERSHIP LA contract of percnership boving 2 capital of P3,000.00 ‘or more. im money or property, shal appeae In pai instrament {il ricordod inthe Scents an #schange Commission. However, ‘sn this no eompled th, tha pertasrsip ad the members ‘ere romain Hable fo hid peruons (Ar 1722, NCC) 2. If what is contributed ip real property, an inventory shouldbe attached and here muct be «pabliinstrament garding the partnership end an ventory ofthe soid propery sized by the partes sheuld be ettached to the public instruments Tf ths is aa complied it, the parterohip i void and has ao jaridial ernie a betwen the pois KINDS OF PARTNERSHIP ‘contig to iit a partnership may be general or limite: (GENERAL PARTNERSHIP — & partnership where al the paris are general partners who are ale even to extant of thar Individual propertee ater hn exhaation che partearahip atts LIMITED PARTNERSHIP — A partnership where one purtnar is a gonerl parner and tho other are limited partners A Tinted partnor i ihle only ta the extent ahi omiibution ‘tote objet, « partnership ether universal particular. UNIVERSAL PARTNERSHIP — This moy refer toniversl partoerahip of al present property ort 0 universal parece of Sprott Universal partnership of all present property — AA'partnersip ofall prose property hat im which {the portaore contribute all tho propery which actually bolotg to them to common fund, with the intention ofAivding the sane among themselves well all the Droits whieh they may acqlze herewith. (Are 1779, fat per, NCO) (©) Universal partnership ofall profite ~ Comprise all thatthe partner tay soqure ky tei industry ce were turing the existence of the partnership (Art. 179, 2nd per, NCO PARTICULAR PARTNERSHIP ~ A particular parsnership Ins fr ts objet determinete things, or du exeraze ca profession KINDS OF PARTNERS A partner may e a capitalist partner or an industrial partner Instr ts tet entibation 2a the parcnership concern. ‘Apartnecmay be a gener] partner ra inited partor inofor as ibility i mend, ‘A poreon may be a managing parser, silent partner, liquidating partner o a secret partner inoofar as prtisipation in ths partnorhip ie oncersed. DEFINTION 1. Capitatise Parmer — Thepariner whe contibates money or property te the partnership. 2 Indastriol Portner — Thopartner wh contributes Bis indore 5. General Partner = A. partner who is isha Dyond the extent of hs eonarbution to the parmershlp 4 Limited Partner — A pastaer wo is liable fly to the extent of i ‘cmbeibuton, 5. Secret Partner = A partnar whose connection ‘eth the hrm i kept soot 5 Silent Partner = A. partnar_ who doce not (ake setive partspation fy the management of the ‘partrersh although tbe may be known to he rine. 7. Liguidating Partner — A partnership whe hes charge of liquieting the ‘flare of che partnership ser ite diel, 1V.L0aN DeFIMTION By the contract efoas, on of tho patie deliver 4 anther, citer Something not oncemable to that the liter raay oo the ‘same fr certain time and rebar it in whith case the contract called commadceume or money ot other constable thin, spo the colton Ct che same amount of Ue sume kind and gully shal be pa, in which ease the xatrect i simply cle Joan or mutware, ‘Conmecatum ie osentaly gratuito. Jn commodatw, toe ball cetainn the omnecehip ofthe thing leaned, whl in simple na, evnership pases tothe borer (A 1988,NCC) KINDS OF LOAN 1, Commodatum — One wher the ballor EXAMPLE: A borromed B's ear which be will uso for ‘three days while teking a waecbon in Baguie. B agro ‘lend hisenr te Afr foe. A should vetura Bs car 2. Mutwxm or Simple Loan — One whete of eller ‘uasumabl thing loaned withthe obligation of poping {hehe act ofthe tame india pistiNcrions 1. ComMopaToM (2) Essentially gratuitous, () Ownership ia retained hy the bro lender.(©) tis Joan forse or temporary possoeson. (4) involves real or personal property. (©) Thesamething that was borrowed sballbe retard 2 MUroUM (2) Maybe grataitus or onerous ©) Ownership goes tothe borrower. (© Tess aloan for eonsumpion. @)_Terofare to personal property: (Same amount that was berrowod shall be returned, 2. BASIC PRINCIPLES TO REMEMBER (2) contract of aan i re contrat. Therefore. 6 perfec upon dalivery ofthe ting loaned (0) Dolivory ofthe thing loaned i oseenta! because the purpose ofthe contrat is other te trancfer ite wa or fa awnerahip. (©) Commadetun a purely personal and the borrower connote the thing Ke borrowed te ancther. \V. PLEDGE AND MORTGAGE, DEFINTION ledge i a ral contract whereby ene persn (ella pletgor) eters movable to another tealled pledges) as security for the rincpal obligation end with the understanding that when the ‘bigaten i paid or Flies, he thing pledged shall he returned by ‘the pledgurta the pledge Mortgage isa real cuntract whordby ene person (called the mortgagor ofa his real property te ancther culled mordgngoo) a+ ‘sounty forthe principal ablignion an withthe understanding that ‘When the obligation ispaidr fulfill the mertgngn or encumbrance on the sald property sal be canoe and releused, ‘PROVISIONS COMMON TO PLEDGE AND MORTGAGE ‘Art. 2085, The following requisites aro essentials the contracts ‘otpiedge and mortgage: con INTIAL us A. That they be conctittod to acurs the fullment of « riety obliaton 2. hat the plodger or mortgagor be tho ablute owner of ‘the thing pledged cr morgage: 3. That the persons contitaling the pledge or merigage Ihave the ee apsa thet proper enin the ssenee thereat that they be legally ouered the purpose ‘Third persons who are pros wo he prinioalcligatien may secure the ltr by plodglag or mortgaging thei own property REAL MORTGAGE PLEDGE T Conatisted on ral 1 Conetieted on parmonal propery. fre, 2720) reporty. (Art 2088) 2. Ava ruleymerigagor rotaine |? The thing lodged mast bo the peperty placed in th possession ofthe creditor, or af ‘hid persr by common fagreoment 3. Netvald agsinet hind [8 Not valid agninet shied Dersons fot rested ers ones description (are 2125) Df the thing edged appear [a pullicinctument. (re, 2086 NCO) DISTINCTIONS: REAL MORTGAGE ‘CHATTEL MORTGAGE 7 Canstcued in mmovablos. | Constitatod on movables, 2% May quarantae future [2 Cant guarantee fature sbtigntions, obligation. VI. ANTICHRESIS DEFINITION Article 2122 of the New Civil Code defines entire as fellows! x “By the contrat of antihresis the eric soquiresthe right to reeive the rs ofan immncvable of his debt, with che Uiigston ply thea tothe payment of theaters owing eed ‘hereaRr tothe prncpel of his ered" osmincTions PLEDGES, ANTICHRESIS 1, Pledgeis ecnstiutdon | 1, Antichreae is comstitaed ‘personal property co immovable propery. 12. Natapplieabienofruits. | 2. Thecredivor hs the right to the rats of the immevnblen pisucrions "ANTICHRESIS MORTGAGE 1 The coder aoquies tho | 1. The eredtor bau no ight te ight to recsiv te fruit of | "the fruits ‘an immavabie ois debear BASIC PRINCIPLES: 1, Tho amcunt af the principal and cf the intaost shal be Swed n writing. ouserwisa, to contrat o anticresls VOW. (Are 2104, NCC) 2 Te atl cht vat of Oh Su a the tne of application Gueroof othe interest and prinepal Shall ‘measured of rach eppicaion “The creditor is obliged o pey th taxes und charges upon ‘ie cote unless clherwia stipulated. ‘VIL. COMMON CARRIERS DEFINITION _Astice 1782 of tho New Ciel Cele dafines common carirs flim x “Common carirs are perwns, corporations, fms fr ascocatons engaged inthe bunene af erzying oF tranoporting curren a essensers or gods or both, by land, water orale fr compensation Offering thor service to Use pebl’ “COMMON CARTIER PRIVATE CARRIER 1 A common cari offers its [ 1. Is not available wo the services tothe public-(Art. | pubs bt nly to cere 172,00) ore. ‘CRITERIA AS TO WHETHER A CARRIER IS COMMON OR PRIVATE ‘tho cariris obliged to cary all prsona plying fr pacoage and there isnoegal acne to Tein, fie pusicearrer Othorwss, {tina private care. VIGILANCE REQUIRED OF A COMMON CARRIER Ita bound ts obsorve ENTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE sn the wglanst aver the gerd, 2 Ieis bound to observe EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE Sarthe sty of ta pascongers EXTRAORDINARY VIGILANCE OVER THE GOODS Common carriers are reerontiblo. for the | LOSS, DESTRUCTION OR DETERIORATION ote goole ualess to ames duo to any of hs Flowing eaer 1. Flood, storm, oarthquake, lightning, or other aatural ‘anaster or cist 2 Actothe public enemy in war, whothor intarnational or a 3. Actor omission ofthe shippor or oar ofthe goods ‘4 The charactor oft gods or dae inthe packing or in Ue eonatners Onder or act of competent pubic antheity EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE FOR THE SAFETY OF PASSENGERS ‘rt. 1755. A common cariris bound to cary dhe pasrengers sally as far as haman eare and freight can provide, vane tho ust genes of rey caus esos, which aie eee rat be caruniatances,Chapter XI SUCCESSION ‘CONCEPT ANO DEFINTION OF SUCCESSION ‘nh erly sages of Roman aw, the parents were required 10 “ctare before the Comite Curiota who were their heirs." ane Anaghtors, nd wa wers acknowledged sehr or undor ‘eters, have tho right to thar i their ells. ‘Testamontary nd Intestate sucossons vero already known tothe Romana. As between thom two Kinds af ruceossinns, however, intestate saoresion (ob Intestat) wae the primitive inettation, Prom the concept of intestate sascemion, the omecpt of ‘eoiamentary gucesion grew. By then, the Romans considered it 1 dagrace to de intantate. If oly to sold iatetacy, there was brace then to execute a testament called PSE AES ET LIBRAM lunder and by virtue of which «person who isnot an bai (SUS HERES) or wots member of Ue fer, was appointed a3 ha ‘The concep of sucession in general isthe same Roman Jaw andor the Now Ciel Cage Te means susteting or entoring ‘nto the place or property rights of another. Article 714 of the New Cie Cade defies suseeson a8 “A smote «f acquisition by vias of which the property, righted ‘higations tthe extent ofthe val f the interned of «poreon tc transmitted through his death to cnotheror others citer hy his willo by operation ola." esod on tho suid dblinitien, cucvesion has therfore the flowing elomonts (1) itis aod of acquisitions (2) Property iho rnd obligations te the extent of the value of the isheritance of person are tranamitied te another, (8) The same ace estate touch daa (0 The acannon ber yl = by WHAT INHERITANCE INCLUDES “The nherstance nce al the reper right and obligatiens faperion whieh ave nat extinguished by hs Geath. (Ar. 778, NCC) Inedher word, al property and tansmissble righ ané obligations ‘esting atthe tine ofthe death ofa perven, including aceasion (Fhe scrainn hereftom, are incl ia te ishertance of person. (Ar 781, NCC) “The rights to the sueession are transmit fram che mement tho doth ofthe decodent. (Art. 777, NOC) KINDS OF SUCCESSION 1. Testamentary Succession 2 Legal or Intestate Suozession 3. Mined Succesion (a) Tovtamentary Suoweovion — _Saseaxion which sulis fom the designation of an i, made in a (vl eseouted in Who frm prensa by lw. (Ar 779, NOC) (©) Legal or Intestete Suecession — Saszesion bresribed by operation flaw and whic takes place {fs eraen dit witout wil, oe he sa will but the Sumols vol rus subsequently st ts val. (Are 782, NOO) WHAT IS AIL? ‘A will isn act whereby a person is peraited, with the formals prescribed by lw, to contd (a certain degre, de Aisposition of his estate, vo take elles alter his death (rt. 788, to) 4, A willmust comply with the rns othe law. 2 "Themmiang of wile xtiey a parsenal act and cannot boleftn whole rinpar to the diersion of third person ‘parean tbe accomplished cough the instrumental of fan agent or aluarey. (Sor Are. 79, NCC? 3. less formal act boca thers are legal formats that shuoald be compied with (Swe 783, NCU) 4 Te wile efective oly after the death ofthe testator (Bee Bre. 777, NOC)ae RemonuCMON TOL 5. Avil may be revoked by the tortator at any time before Iie death, Any waiver of restriction of this kind is vod (ar. 828, NCC) ‘The will must be executed voluntary and freely and vwthout foree, duress, fear, of Uhrest, The sume ere rounds for the disllowaneo of the will. (See Art. 889, Keo WHO CAN MAKE AWILL? ‘All person who acont exprsely praibied by low can make will rt'790, NOC) leis easentia, however, thatthe testator must rete sound mind atthe tine of tho oxocuion ofthe wil (Soe Ar 788, NCC) sed lant 18 years of age or ver. (See Art. 797, NCC) WHEN IS A PERSON OF SOUND MIND? ‘Tobe of sound sind, It is not necensary thot the tetator bo ‘nfl ponoeesion of al his renooning favulties, ofthat his mind 5 wholly unbroken, unimpaired, or unshaitered by disease, inary oF oer cause. It shal te suilent Ifthe testator was able ut the time of making he wll oly theatre of he oxtto tobe disposed ofthe proper ebjects of his bouny anc the character of che testamentary fact (are 798, NCC) WILLS ALLOWED UNDER THE NEW CIV. CODE 1. Ordinary or Nota Wil and 2 Welogrephic Wil Ordinary or Notarial Will — Te is a wil which is attested sand acknowleded hore a Notary Public Holographic Will — It is 9 wil which is entirely written, dated and signed Uy the band of the testator himeal. Iie eubjact {eno other fore ard may bo anda in or ent ofthe Philippines, and need nat be witnessed. (See Ar. 810, NCC) [REQUISITES OF A VALID WILL 1, Te must be in weting end executed inthe language and diac now tothe tortor (rt 804,100) 2. The will mnt be subscribed the ond thoreaf by the gure 18 testator bina ce tha etter name writes by me ‘tbr perma hs prennor and by Meese aecon, re 805 HEC, oping por) 4.‘ et be tiered nd ssberbod by hres or mre {rete witenes nthe presence ihe tests and ot toe anther at sentence of opening Poregrephy A. 805, NCC) Sores 4. The tetator or the pers route ly hin owe his ‘adh intl wo ha wig cac on very pa hee exo io delet arg 5 Allo pags shall we numbered coreatiely in eters ‘ond cathe ep poet fence Gee 805 NCO) 6. Theattesttion shall state the numberof pages used upon ‘which Che wil 8 rth, tne! the fact tht the fester Signed the will und every page thereof, or cause wine ‘thor person to wete under his express diretion, in tho [presence ofthe instrumental witnesses and all tho pages Uheree nthe presence of the stator and of one wna, 1, Ife attestation clauses ma language not known tthe Witnoaaoe, Lokal Beimtorpreted to Gem Tae atenttion hal state 4 Thomumberand pages wad and upon which the will aswntter: b. That tho tstatorsiged or xprocaly enusod another ‘erson isin) the wil and evry page therein the resonee ofthe instrumental witnesses, © That the mscrumental wimosses witnesaed and signed tho will and all the pages taeroef ia the presence ofthe testator and of eno ancther [ACTUAL EXAMPLE OF AM ATTESTATION CLAUSE ATTESTATION CLAUSE ‘This insirumont conics of _ pages induding thio page, wasn this day of. 30 in the Mlunisipality «. Province __ signed by the testator, tthe bottom ofthe strumeat and atthe ef ‘nena margin of ech and every pops thers, in tho prosonco of all,1 uemeopueTION 70 1A ‘and ach oft, ane thereapon, at his request, have witnessed and ‘Ngned the wil and ll pages tere in the presenesof tho totator fi ofeach ther. oane) heme) ‘Cael ACTUAL EXAMPLE _OF AM ATTESTATION CLAUSE, wee A SoehtoncaUseb SOME OTHER PERSON TO WE HES WAME ATTESTATION CLAUSE ‘This instrument onsets of pages ineading this raze, yn he Muni aaimuneed and puis Tabet wlan testament rd torent he name wader {Sisaprose diesen ate bottom of sid instrument and the ‘anid arin cach and every page thoref, in tha presence of al of fey and we thereupon, atthe tostators request, have witnessed and ‘igwed the wl an al ges Ubereat i ube presence of the tetatar fad of euch ether. Co ‘Wane area ‘ame ‘Adlivess) [ACTUAL EXAMPLE OF AN ACKNOWLEDGHENT OF A MILL ACKNOWLEDGMENT Rapubicof th Pipes Ri tte Miineralisrcity of in ead provines, on this dey of 80, pore sypeared the Testator and is three) asteumental ‘hme to i ‘and eS 2" —ailimnawn tome ioe the same persone who ‘Geeited and atiosied, respectively, the reging Last Wil snd ‘Testament consisting. O° Sages incadingte one which this acknowledgment lswiten, and they all acknowedged {Game that tho Tostator signa tha will and evory page thereof on tho loft marein in the presence ofthe Testator and of ene anithe”, that al dis pages of sod ill re numbered cerclativel in letters placed fn the upper part of exch page, and thatthe attestation cae Ine language koown to the instrumencel witnesses; they further telinevledgol We me thet the aaid wll and ettetation are thei mn free and voluntary eet and deed. The Residence Certfates ofthe said Testator and thre (@) instrumental witnesses were exible No. eeu at. No, issued a Na__ tow, a Ne asvad at, = ‘Witnessed my hand and notarial seal st the place and on the ate frat above lated, otaiy Puls nil Decomber $1, 20__ (Gea and Documentary Stamp) Dew. No. rage No. Book No. Series 30 ‘QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES TO NOTARIAL WILLS witness tothe oxecaton ofa notarial wll mast her (@ of scund mind (at east 18 years od; (© oc bine:Ea reonvenIoS TOL (4) slotovead and write, (©). damien the Philippines, (®)-mustnothaveheenconriedeffileation fe decument Derry ote esters. AWILL CAN BE REVOKED OR ALTERED INCASE OF SUPPLEMENT OR ALTERATION ‘Aer the execution of 4 wil, snother will may be excated iter to alter the same te ma an explanation er sdetion the wil ervey made, This wl alles a coda which x darived Som atin “eres” and which means te will.” ‘Incase ofc between wind eal, the lntter previa because It exprenses Tilt wil and ish o the Year. ‘A cud shall be exceed asin the cae af a will Art. 825, co) INCASEOOF REVOCATION ‘A will may bo roveked by the tetator at any tine before is oath, Any waivor or orton of hb rights void (Art. 25, NCC) However, no wil all be revoked seein the flowing see: 1 Byimpleaton afew; or 2 Bysome wil codiior other writing executed as provided in cane willsser 3. By baring, toring, cancalling, oF obliterating the will withthe intention of revoking bythe testator hime Orbs seme othr porsomin his presence and by his express Airvctin. if bureed, tre, eancalod, oF eblteratad by tome other penn, withost the express direction ofthe ‘estator, the Will ay Sl be exaiched the arte Aistibated accordance therewith, fas contants, an Aue execution andthe fuetof ts unauthorized destrcsion, ‘ancslaton, or obliteration are established ascerdina 0 the Ralew of Goat (Ars 899, WOO) (Chapter Xi TORTS AND DAMAGES DEFINTION OF A quaSLOELICT Article 2176 of the Now Civ Code defines aquast-lictin hit manner: Whoever by actor omission causes damage to never, there being falter negligence, i obliged to pay forthe dams Aone, Such autor nogligenee ire no preexisting oaaciual felaton between the partis, sealed a quasrdelict and is vero Up the prevaion ofthis chaptor”™ REQUISITES OF A QUASLOELICT "This arte state the requisite of quas-dlit fo wi (@) There matt bean aot or mission; (©) Such ctor oiston canes damage to anche: (e) Such ator omarion ie eruaed by frat negligence; and (@) There is no preecsting contractual ration between the QUAS!DELICT If ACIVIL WRONG A quasi dalit in « sill wrong, not erime because i isnot causod by an intntnal or makeous act but by mere foul oe negligence. tis dependent of contrat beens ifthe ani ator oneson ‘sin voli ea contrat, then Ce rut wou eta ters sere breach of contract THE ACT OR OMISSION MUST BE WITHOUT INTENT TO CAUSE DAWAGE "The actor omission must be without intent to cause damaze because if there is intent fo couse damage, the aet or onion becomes crime In euch @ eae, the vl Habit oe mach ot otnision will b governed by the Revised Peal Ce which provides 1 follows “Art, 1161. CIVIL, OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM (CRIMINAL OFFENSES SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE PENAL LAWS, SUBJECT 10 THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 2171, AND THE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER, PRELIMINARY TITLE ON HUMAN RELATIONS, AND OF ‘TITLELXVIII OF THIS BOOK REGULATING DAMAGES” |F THERE Ig NO INTENTION TO CAUSE DAMAGE Tr the actor omission that caused the damage was mated unitentsnally flor culpeOtharwiv it edaloy an et that comes a eri. Distinctions ‘cuPA “cuLPA ‘cunra conrractuat | AQUILIANA | CRIMINAL (@) There ro [(@) Therois ao |e) Theroie no pre-existing presisting eit Oiigaien liao, shiigation expressor Implied (©) Preponterance |) Preponderance | 8) The eime oferidencais |" ofevidence la | must be required needed, proven beyond reasonable outs. (9 Defense ofa | (6) Defense ofa |e) This defense good tatherat |” good fatherof |" cannot be ‘afamilyinthe | afamilyin the | interpocod If Selocionefthe | Selectionocthe | theempleyes cemplayee is emplyeesisn | i inalvent ‘ot proper proper defence | erincepablo andcomplete | aftne mplayer. | Yopaythe Afense ofthe Ge arp or employer. Tapa, the emmploreris| subsidiary Katie roa AND BAO = @) Theectene |) The fuk or |) The moceree otacontrac neigonce of | ofthe ascumed fmustbe pred. | thedefendant | spreumed it wan leo ‘must be proven. | untilthe ‘Proven tht the ‘cotrary ie Contract wes not proved compiled with, itis presumed thatthe debtor (@) Wesiienceis |e) Nogtgence |e) Negligence aly ineKental |" salve, isairen, tthe substantive, and | substantive, performance Indopendent. ad fran existing Insopendant. ‘olizetion basoé WHATS NEGLIGENCE? ‘Article 1179 of the New Civil Cake defines negligence es “the ‘mioron ofthat diigo which ia required bythe areumstances of persone place, and time” Based on this definition, Ue degree of care, precaution and vigllnco that shouldbe absorved depends on the cncumtances of persins,plae nnd time, That which may be considereé therfore 4s uficient care and precation ima set of creumstances, may be Inguliieat in anche st of circumstances tat confront the same individ. ence, when A drives his nein thickly papa place ike DWvisoria oF Guiap, be saould kos, even without being tal, that sdring dey time, there aze nt otly plenty of peape who ers Che ‘treo but thatthe are also alot fears jeepreys ues carte and Aalvarypanalnim both sides othe sree: Under thacnccnstancen, [Ashould observe a higher dngres of are and preesiien because i Ihedows not chserve this, there sno only a reat possi. bat lao 6 great danger het he will it or jure pedestrian cr Uaat he wil thump or hit another viele ‘8 may no: bo diving his ear, bat a PUB (puiie uty os) ‘ith approximately 50 passengers from Malle Bayt. Here he ‘ol wet pase through Divison or Quinpe, ti be il pase ara‘long highway where vebisles travel at « fast speed, util he ‘oacod Une dangerous Kenaon read, going to Baguio City Here he Es ompleyed ao ¢dever of « publie wily bus whic i engaged in ‘he inner of ranspertingpastengor, and turaler, tha degre ‘ci and donc roired of tha carrior nexcraoninaryaligence ‘aerated by Ariel {735 and 1756 of tae New Cl Code. *Art.1789. COMMON CARRIERS, PROM THE NATURE OF THEIR BUSINESS AND FOR REASONS OF PUBLIC POLICY, ARE BOUND 70 OBSERVE EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE IN THE VIGILANCE OVER THE GOODS AND. POR THE SAFETY OF THE PASSENGERS TIUANSPORTED [BY THEM, ACCORDING 10 ALI, THE CIRCUMSTANCES. OF BACH CASE. SUCH EXTRAORDINARY DIMGENCE IN THE VIGILANCE OVER TIE GOODS 1S FURTHER EXPRESSED. IN ARTICLES 1734, 1735, AND 1745, NOS. 6, 6, AND 7, WHILE ‘THE EXTEAORDINARY DILIGENCE’ FOR THE SAFETY OF THE PASSENGERS IS FURTHER SHT FORTH IN ARTICLES 1755 AND 1756." “Art. 1785. 4 COMMON CARRIBE 18 BOUND 10 CARRY THE PASSENGERS SAFELY AS FAR AS HUMAN CARE AND FORESIONT CAN PROVIDE, USING THE UNOS? DILIGENCE OP VERY CAUTIOUS PERSONS, WITH A DUE REGARD POR ALL THE CIRCUNSTANCES." ‘Take note that a8 provided in Article 1733, commen cers are bound to obseve extracriary ligencs™ x = “aecoreing & al ereumstancs ofeach caso," and as provided in Artie L780, the feomuen arte "is bound wo carry the passengers sally as far as Tunen car ani fnengcan provide, uring te utmost dligencs of ‘ery eats porsens, with «due regard forall the crvamatance” ‘The Supreme Court has thoveore fined negizynee in ths ‘Neghigonceta want ofcarerequzodhy the cirsumotances 1s a relative or cnmparative, not an ebsslte term, nd it fpphiston depends upon the mttation of the partes and the cogree of eare and vigsinee which the eireamstances acsonably require. Where tbe dange is rey» ish degree Of care is tesemry, and Uae Gilre to haere isa want of Grdinary care ander the cewmstances” (Corliss Manila Failrsed Coy L21202, March 28, 1059, \WHATIS THE TEST TO DETERMINE NEGLIGENCE? ‘Thetastethier"Wold a pradent maa in his portion) forease Tharm wo the person injred as a reasonable consequence of the coarse about to be pursued? Ifo, the law lmposes# daly nthe facie b roan fom that eure, oF to cake preautin again es ‘lechieves rouls and the falluze to do wo comrites negligence ‘easenablefracght of harm ia neenscary before nogligence ca be hold wo est" (Picart Smith 97 Pil 300) DEGREE OF CARE OR DILIGENCE THAT IS REQUIRED ‘That standard or deere of cae or diligence that shoal be sdoerved is hat which is eapected ef a geod father of amy ales, the lew or stipulation ofthe parties ryuires another staMan of WHAT ARE THE DEFENSES THAT CAN BE INTERPOSED IN ‘uasi.beuicr? In the string of eases that have alvady been desided by the ‘Supreme Cour, the filloving defenses have bron interposed and were copsidered meritorious, to it (1) UABT CLEAR CHANCE ~ ta Pet». smth, ihe pli who was siding » pony was oignaly at ful, Frbeing in the wrong side ofthe Lrg, but defendant Smith He the lst eoar ckarea to avosd the pending ‘harm by merely awerving. Since he fled to do this, ih wwashe who was hal Hable for damages, (@ CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE — ‘The defendant say claim that paints own negligence ceutribaied to Ine injary. This defen, howover wll merly eitgate te award of damages. Inthe Phoens ease, the drier of the car was om his way home uf ang a shot br 80 Iiquor bat hie nese ie merely comtebutery and We dansagos therfore weve mitigated (8) PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE LOSS OR INJURY IS ‘THE NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF ~ Inthe Phony cease, the Supreme Court hold that eth pies were negligent, but the immediate and prosimate cause ofthe sotident and of ta car driver's injares was the wrong fad negligent mane in which the ou wat phe or the truck dewors ask a due ears.”(@) DEFENSE OF DUE DILIGENCE IN THE SELECTION AND SUPERVISION OF EMPLOYEES This is available an defense only in cul aguilana, nd notin the case of olga contrat (8) ASSUMPTION OF RISK — ‘Ihe defense was allowed fn Afialds », Hilsol, ot al. (85 Phil. 67), bat ths wus rejerted in Moces Norte Blecirie Company v. Cour? of Appeals. The ras “eter non fi inguria” relied pen ‘by potldaner finds no application inthe latter case. The ‘qurt's reasoningis as flbve "Ils imperative to note the urrourlingcircumtances witch impelled the deceased {o Teave the comfort of a reof and brave the subsicing typhoon, The deceased wos on her way to her Emery fore to see It atthe geods were ot flooded. As such, ‘ean she be punished for exercising her right t9 protect her property from the fleods by impating upon her the unfevorable presumption that sho assumed tho risk of perconal injury? Detitely not” (@ PRESCRIPTION — A mtion mey bo fled on the ‘round tha the action (bssec cn quas-delit) bas already proceribod. Tho fe Lased on tho provision ef Avie 1148 ‘tthe New Ciel Code whieh provides, “lowing actions trae be inettuted within four gears” fone that oan be cor ofthe ania under Artiste DTRY of the New Civil Coe ® FAULT OF ENGINEER, ARCHITECT OR CONTRACTOR — This defense can be interpowed by the owner of the building if third persons safer damages Tecate cf defect in construction Gommtted eter By the engineer, contractor or archiiest. (OLD CASES PICART y- SMITH ‘97 Phil. 19 PRINCIPLE: “WHERE BOTH PARTIES ARE GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE, BUT THE NEGLIGENT ACT OF ONE SUCCEEDS THAT OF THE OTHE BY AN APPRECIABLY INTERVAL OF TIME, ‘THE ONE WHO HAS THE LAST REASONADLE OPPORTUNITY 10 AVOID THE DMPENDING cuarren an HARM AND HAS TO DO 80 IS CHARGRABLE WITH “THE CONSEQUENCES, “WITHOUT REFERENCE 10 THE PRIOK NEGLIGENCE OF ‘THE OTHER PARTY” FACTS: Psintift Pisa was viding a pony on bridge, be saw sn pproaching automebile an he inproperly pulled his horse over to the railing in the right, Che wrong side of Uh brid. The diver of {he sulomobile waded his hoen but cart made no move tg to the reht side. He guided hie sar to tho ght without diainution of opoed unt he was oa ow fort away. He turned to the right boat passed so cosa to the horse thatthe latter being Pightaned, Jumped around and wae illed by the peosing ca. Pleart was thrown off his horse ond suffered contusions Hs sued Smith forthe value of his animal. medical expenss ad damage ‘this apparel. ISSUE: Who is at fale? MELD: Plaintiff Peart was originally at taut, but defendant Smith ‘nad the Inst soar chanco to avoid the imponding harm by meray ‘swerving. Smith fale 10 do this and he abould therefore be ‘chargeahle for tho cansquence of his acts, without reference te the Dror negligence ofthe ether party. UMALL y. BACANT (eOSCRA 263 PRINCIPLE: THE TEST TO DETERMINE. THE EXISTENCE, OP NEGLIGENCE, ASENUNCLATEDIN PICART 4. SMITH 1S THiS “DID THE DEFENDANT iv “DOING. THE ALLEGED. NEGLIGENT ACT USE THAT REASONABLE CARE AND ‘CAUTION WHICH AN ORDINARILY PRUDENT BERSON WOULD HAVE USED IN THF SAME. SITUATION? IP NOT, THEN HE IS GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE.” mn thie Coso, the Court found out that series of negligence ‘were committed by the defendant and his employees,FACTS: ‘Au asotult of trong typhoon that hit Alcals, Pangasinan on. May 14, 1972, hina plants near Alale lect Pent fll on the slaerie wire which canted tebe ont. One end of he wire wa AR ‘hanging on tho cleric post and the othr fel onthe ground under the fallen banana plants. Knowing ths, the Baraagey Capa thd fan employee ofthe eloctris plant about it are acked him bo fi Mansel Says, aby living nearby, got in contact wih the ive eu sare which led ic his ath Fidel Seynes, father of Manuel Syne, fled an action for damages agnnst Teodoro Umall, owner and ‘manager af the elec plant ‘UMALT'S CONTENTION: ‘The deoth of Manvel was dc to aferaitoas event (erring to ‘the strong storm that aed th besana plants te fal sd out tho slates) IssuE: Ia the onner ofthe let plant Mable fir damages? HELD: ‘mali was beld lable fr damages. The employees of Ala Electric Plant were already asvare ofthe pssble damage caused by ‘thestamm tothe electric ines whieh isdangerous to Mound property, but they dit not cut of fom the plat the fw of electric along the tines They cul have done this pending inspection of the wires Lieve, they dd not take the neccnary precaution to eliminate the source of danger to the sletrc line, Knowing that ll heen plants were standingeneloretod ground and which ae higher than the elect post. The court alse tek nc of Cipriano Baldorer's nevligence. He, being an employes of the electric lant and ware of| ihe Ire ent vite did ovt labo ho wecseery precauion to prevent saybedy Com appreecng de place CULION ICE, FISH, ETC. v. PHILIPPINE MOTORS ‘Sei iw PRINCIPLE: WHEN A PERSON HOLDS HIMSELP OUT AS [BEING COMPETENT TO DO THINGS, HE WILL BE HELD LIABLE POR NEGLIGENCE IF HE WAILS 70) BXHIRIT ‘THE CARE" AND SKILL OF THE OND ORDINARILY SKILLED IN THE PARTICULAR WORK WHICH HE ATTEMPTS robo. FACTS: ‘The manager of defendant corporation acepied the jb of ‘changing tho geouine engine of plains oat. ANorinctalling ‘ew fel tank’ end a new earburwer, the boat wa tak ost for ‘ria. During tis perc aback re oosureed inthe opine of the ‘engine. The boa was ulinstely destroyed. Planitia acsion Uoreeover the valu rte bs frum Ue doendan. ISSUE: Is thot fiw an avidablesoident? Who ic negligent? HELD: ‘Tho burning of the boat resulted from an accent, but his sccdont wat ip no wonoo an unavosdabe oct dent should are Dorcured if he observed the care ar skill of ene ordinarily tilled in the pertcalar work which be sttempte to do. When a person holds imei oot ts being eampatent to do things, ho wll to bald liable for Deiizence if befall to exhibit Ue care and SE of one ordinarily shied inthe parialor work which he aitempta t do ‘Tho defendant was held abe forthe valu of the vessel (CANGCO v. MANILA RAILROAD ‘33 Phil. 768 PRINCIPLE: IP A PRUDENT MAN COULD FORESEE HARM 48 4 RESULT OF THE COURSE HE WILL ACTUALLY PURSUE, IT IS HIS DUTY TO. GUARD AGAINST THE CONSEQUENCES OF HISACTS FACTS: lain is residing in Sam Mateo, Rin, end he used to ride defendant's rn Does ofa ass supplied bythe compsny. He was about tall tro tb tran Duis fet eamesn ntact with 9 sec watermelons are hs fet slipped fom under bm rhe fll lant His bey ollod rom the platform and wasdrawa under she ‘moving car, whore his right arm was badly rushed and lecoreted. Plain sued dafendant far damages. Tho dafendent contendme emopUCTON To LAN smong ators, thatthe said aoident would not have happened hi lant waived uni the tain eeme tea fall icp. ISSUE: Ie aid contention tenable? ELD: "There isa breach of contract of earsage and MRK fled to ‘exccaedue care In not providing for safe ext of passengers. The Yatermelons ae inthe platforms where they should be placed. Zaher they should have been removed from the platform "The pint may have mazumad the rk ftom bosrding the car undra enditon ope fo ha Wiew but ti nat efor hi to ‘asume the risk thatthe motorman, Enowing the eistnce of uch & ‘Stuatioa, wll increase his perl by accelerating is speed before be {s planted safely in the platform, Reusonae en give ther condcs ly the circumstances which are before them or known ta Wom, ‘The stuatien, os sforementione, is kaewn to the metorman, bat Tested to tale Us precnaten rhc Se neque of feet asonabe man in ven station. The defndent war held bable Sr damages NEW CASES PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE. ‘COMPANY, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS GH.Ne. S707, Sept. 28, 1989, PRINCIPLE: THE VICTIM 1S SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ‘THE CONSEQUENCE OF HIS INPRUDENCE. HE HAD THE LAST CLEAR CHANCE OR OPPORTUNITY 10 AVOID THE ACCIDENT, NOTWITHSTANDING ‘THE NEGLIGENCE HE INPUTS TO PLDT FOR LEAVING AN OPEN "TRENCH UNCOVERED, ANTONIO'S NEGLIGENCE 18. NOT MERELY CONTRIBUTORY BUT GOES TO THE VERY CAUSE OF THE OCCURRENCE OF THE ACCIDENT, AND WHICH PRECLUDES HIN'TO ‘RBCOVER DAMAGES, ‘curren x 6 ‘Antonio sued PLDT forthe injures he sustained when his Joop ran over & mound of eur sd fell ins a open trench, cuvationallogedly undertaken by PLU fr te iastallaion ots Underground condi este. ‘The crmplaint alleged that Antoni filed to notice the ops. leonsh which was lot soovered beosec ofthe creping daracos and the lack of any warning light signs Antonio was on the inside lane before i swerved to Bi tho “ecident moana” Antonio is miiar not only of the street, bat alo of the excavation the slcet ast appears that he pasoer on tht street lnet enya issuR: 1s Antoni guilty ofeontriontory naglgenee 4 if. doo hs morly mitigate the damages fs i claiming, oF dos this preehide his right to reaer damages? HELD: ‘The negligence of Antonio mas nst ony contibutery to his injuries but goos to the very coe ofthe ecsurrence of ts acedoat, ab ono of dotormining factors, and thoroby precludes his right to reover damages ‘Tho por of the road were known to and benoe fssumed by Anton. By exercising reasenable care and pradonce, he could have aveded the injures, even aasuring that there was me allege negigonce en the par of PLT. ‘The wars signe onld not have corapletely prevented the cident, The onl parpeee of suid igs was ofr and wara the public of tho presence ef excavations on the nits. Anno already Tne of the prosence of said excavations. It was not the lack of Knowledge afthore excavation whinh caused th jecp ffl into the ‘excavation but tho unseplaned sudan soring athe jeep fromthe ‘sdelane wards the Acide mind. He cannot charge PLATT for Ins injuries where hs cen failure lo exereee dae ed reasonable ‘ate wat te cause thereRis hetho sesetal norm and nena that one shoal xeriae fe rouscnable degree cf eautin for hi own protetion. Antonio had the lot leer shanco or opportunity to avo the aceon, retwithetanding tho nelggnos he inptae to PLDT. Axa render (ELacion Stret he patod on that stect elmost avery day and haa Itnowlodge ofthe presence and lention ef the axevatins thor. Hit negligence expe him fo danger Honce, bea ally reponsible fer Use consequence his prudence PHOENIX CONSTRUCTION, INC. 'v. INT. APPELLATE COURT Gi. No- 65996, Maren 10, 187 PRINCIPLE: ‘THE VICTIM, THE DRIVER OF THE CAR, AND) ‘THE DUMP TRUCK OWNED BY PHOENIX IN. AKEROTH NEGLIGENT, BUTTHE INMEDIATS. CAUSE OF THE VICTIM'S INJURY WA3 THE WRONGFUL AND NEGLIGENT NANNER IN WHICH THE TRUCK WAS PARKED OR THE “TRUCK DRIVER'S LACK OF DUB CARE, FAC ‘Aner a dinner ccctailmecing with his boos where he bed takan a bot or to of quer, A went homo af about 130 AML, driving hs car. On hit way heme air crossing aa intersection, Is car headlights nucdenly filed, He evitbed hie hoadlighto to “iriht an there esa a Ford dump track which ic about 2 U2 svete away from his car "The dap truck ia owned by Phenix, Ine. twat parked onthe ight and ideo he ervey acing the snoring tra I partly blocks the may of dhe incoming tafe. Thorne ight and no eas raring devices, ‘Arie io avo «clin by eworving ic ear othe Toft bat to 0 ava Ths car mashed ino the damp trude Asa esa, A Sulfered physiel injuric fail ears norvaue breakdown, and bss five gud ridge dentures, A od Phoonis aad ta diver [No CONTENTION — ‘he legal and praimate caste of his injures was ths negligent manner in which Pools dewer had parked ibe dump truck. HELD: ON THE ISSUE OF NEGLIGENCE AND PROXIMATE (CAUSE OF INJURY — Both were negligent bat tho inmodiate fand proximate eante cf tho accigert and of A injaios was the ‘prong and nogigent manner in which the tock Was parked oF Ue ec river's “Taek of ie care” ‘The selien of 1 car with the dump truck Is a nacural and frestetietonsaenee of the track driver negligence. The Inoggence ofthe tak driver, fir rx be 4 “passive and stale ‘mdi was thor an indspstable ad een case. The improper parking of the dump wack reaied an unreasonable Hal of Injury for anyone driving, and for hoving rete i a, ue ruck driver must he he respons ‘Ns negligence, altbaaes later in point of time than the ruck driver seplgence, fs merely contributory and Ube damagas therefore tate wil recover io subset Ye muligation by th cours, In aocerdance wit Arie 2170 of tho Cl Code (ON THE ISSUE OF DAMAGES ~ In a mit fer dances acing from a questi, where th plaints aglgenco wo ntaibuory, the demands of substantial aie may be atid by Clloeting mest ef the damages ca a 2080 rate, Based on this, the flowing wore ame: (1) 29% ofthe damages anarded by the appllate cour shall borne by tho pati, (2) 97% stall be paid hy the deoor and hi amlayer who shal e eli bable to 8 (8) ‘The award of exemplary damages stall be tome ceshanvely bythe catendant Pent ON THE HISTORICAL FUNCTION OF THE LAST (CLEAR CHANCE DOCTRINE The lst lar chance doctrine ofthe carmen law was imported fn ourjursictin,butit iss matter fr debate whether to what ‘eden tn fond is way ata the Cir Cede of tse Paippines ‘The hstorial function ofthe doctrine (a Cho common la as ‘iigate the harshness of another common law doctrine or ule, TA'SF contributory noghigenen, (Phere Construction, Ine Intermediate Appllte Cour th)‘VERGARA v. COURT OF APPEALS GAN. 72679, Sep 30, 1987 PRINCIPLE: THE OWNER OP THE CAR CANNOT BE PAULTED BECAUSE HE LOST CONTROL, (OF HIS CAR WHEN IN ORDER TO AVOID HEAD.ON COLLISION WITH 4 PASSENGER BUS WHICH SUDDENLY SWERVED INTO HIS LANE, HE VEERED HIS CAR TO THE SHOULDER OF THE “HIGHWAY | AND COLLIDED WITH A PRIVATE SIKEP. FACTS: ‘Aand his iad wer eavelling by ex to Mania fro Baguio From the oppose direct he fllovng were irsvelingatiyce, ss pomenger bus aad private jeep in tha! order, The bus ted tvertake the tscyie, but in doing si werved into the lane of A. ‘This prompied A by veor his cart the shoulder of the highway to aod» head-on ellien, A, weve, let soatl of scar easing IW olde wih the privat ep. No changes wore Med agains dhe ‘ener of tho passenger bus A boven the eccased in ermine fe of recleesImpradence resting t dainage to property nel ‘multiple physical injuries. Aclsimed Uhat es mot guly a riminal ‘oglgerce because leo caiol of his car when the bus swerved inohb lane ISSUE: Inthe doen ofA tenable? HRLD: ‘The ower ofthe sar cennct be faulted bess he ost control this car whan in order to oldu head-on ellsun win a passenger bas which suddenly swerved into his lane, be vere his ea Wo ae shoulder of the hia snd ealided with a plea oop. ‘Therodl eulpri isthe passenger bus bat there were no charges {leg The cour ei that althoue A was not criminally neplizent, ‘and therefore ot held ble fr ere, hore is enough evidence {o prove that A should have exereod Ite more caution nd discretion in reacting tothe threat ofa headhan collision. For this eas, be was adjaged cvly Hable forthe hospital expenses ant ‘unearned solaris ofthe iets, RADIO COMMUNICATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS GR.No, 19628, March 19, 1901, PRINCIPLE: ROPI'S CLAIM OF GOOD FAITH PREDICATED ON THE EXHAUSTION. OF — SOCIAL, CONDOLENCE FORMS IS OF NO MOMENT. GROSS NEGLIGENCE. AND CARELESSNESS CAN. BE ATTRIBUTED 10. DEPENDANT. IN NOT SUPPLYING ITS STATIONS WITH ADEQUATE SOCIAL CONDOLENCE FORMS, FacTs: Miners. sn Foret Timan seat a telegram of condlence te ther cain, Mr snd Mis ilsro Medorands through Radin Conmuntation of the Philpines, Inc. (CPD) to conver their deepest spat for tbe death of the mothecinaw cF Haro, “Mr ad Nis. Haro Medora ‘Trinide, Calayes May God glve you courage and stcengih to bear your Joss our deepest sympathy to you ad membersof the fails. MINER & FLORY” message as communicatod and dalivored to the addrassee was {ypewnttn on a “HAPPY BIETHDAY" card and placed inside a “CHRISTMASGRADE envelope. Believing that the tranamital of the sforesaié telgrem in ‘thet manner was done Imentenally and with gros breach of contract resulting In efile, contempt, and humliation of the Drive respondents ad the adresses inclading thet fends a ‘elatives, the Spouses Timan demanded an explarsten. ‘The Timane were not sted withthe explanation of ROPI, hone, hei complaint fr amen spuinst RCP ‘Taotrial court doeied in fevor ofthe Timans, andthe Court of ‘Appeals efrmed the decision ef te lover cour tt.[RPI argued that it stil corey transmiied the text of the Lelegram and was recive hy the eresso on tine despite the act that thers weer in the socal frm and envelcpe se CPI asterted that there was na showing that st has any motive tacatine harm or damage to the Tene, ssuR: Te REPT guilty a nagligence? Ie RCPI guilty of bad faith, rand and mahee? HELD: Anyone whe svals of the flition of & tlegram company fan chon to ned his massage inthe erdnay frm or in «eo Tore, In the ordinary Tare, Us txt ofthe message is delivered i fan exvelepe matching the purpeeo ef tho ccasion ond the words ‘and intent othe meosage The cendar pays a higher amount for the ‘social telegram then fr ordinary form enc, when RCP! ypod the mmessege of condolence ina buthday cardand delivered the seme (ileal Chrstmasuram envelpa Iteommtied a beich of entre ‘aswel as grass negigone. Ts pcos that had ran et of sol femolence cars and enveipe is fimsy and unacceptable. 1 old net ave been fated had if delivered the message in the ordinary form and reimbursed the difarnce in tha cot & the sender hat by trnamsting t enStingly, hrongh other epi forms, clery, albeit outwardly, pertraying the cpooste fangs of joy and happinose and thanksgiving, ROPI only cxaerbated the Sorronful situation cf the addressee and sender. This boichery ‘expoced not only RCPTs gree negligence but elo its alleuanoss and Airegand forthe sentiment oft lentle, which is antassount ‘wanton bende, fir which i suas be Bod Kable fr damages "Wisc surprising that when the Tunas telegraphic message eshte cousin, it eeame the ke of Ube Medorance's rend, ‘lative, and asseiatos who thought that the unpardonable mix: lap was a rckery ofthe death of tho mathersn-law cf ta senor tous, Thus, twas oo unexpeeted Ut because ofthis ural Incident, which cansed much embarrasment and datas to ‘Timane, he saffored neraaneas and hypertension reeuting i hit confinement for three dye tthe hospital Under the circumstances, defendant's plot of good faith predated on th eahaustion of social condebence frie can beacaeptad, Grove neglgene or creetsnens ca be altesued ty Alefedant isnot suppling Ita vrsou talons with such sues fund edequate cal enadolence frm when 1 held out he public ‘he avallabity of such socal condlence forms and accepted fur a fee the traosmssion of message on sai forms. Kaowing that there sre oo such frm ott to hy Hts matril intel menage St enering ints a contrac for he ransmisscn of message in such forms as testified toby to material eontyel menage, and encering into a contrect for the transmission of message in euch forma, dlefecant commuted exe afbed Sith Euud and malice, ST, FRANCIS HIGH SCHOOL, BAL. ¥. ‘COURT OF APPEALS GH.No, 82465, Feb. 25, 1901 PRINCIPLE: THE SCHOOL AND THE TEACHERS ARE NOT NEGLIGENT. THE INCIDENT. HAPPENED [NOT INTHE SCHOGL AND NOTIN A SCHOOL DAY, AND WHILE THE TEACHERS AND THE STUDENTS. WERE HOLDING "A PURELY PRIVATE AFFAIR, A PICNIC. ‘THE CLASS ADVISER OF THE CLASS WHERE FERDINAND BELONG3D, DID HER BEST AND EXERCISE DILIGENCE OF 4 GOOD PATHER OF A FAMILY 10 PREVENT ANY UNTOWARD INCIDENT O8 DAMAGES TO ALL STUDENTS, Facts: Ferdinand Cartillo is a 1S-yearold frst your high choot stedant at. Francs High Seo He wanted tom a seheol pene ‘Beach But be wat not allwed ty ha parents He was allows, however, to bring feed tothe tatehors and rear homeaer dng fe. Nevertheles,Ferdmana went on wt the teachers the banc rca of thee persue ‘While thoteachers and hestadentsweroin theater. including Ferdinand, oe fhe female ethers who was apparently d:wvaing was reseucd by Ferdinand. Uartunataly. I wae Perdiaand hunsel two drowned, ‘The school and the teachers were sind Sr dames Perdinand’e parent. They contended What the defendants fede‘eorese the proper dzone ofa ane father af family in preventing heir son's crowning, ani prayed for actual, moral and exemplary damages, etcrney’s fos and ceo ei "Tho ‘viel sour rendored judgment against the teachers, ‘rdering ll of them to py plintifs PD 000 C0 ee ctu 120.0000 ae moral damages, F15,000 00 a aterm fees et ay the costs, Th case aga the ached, Iawever, was dismissed ‘ThoCourtofAppecteraled tht the schoo and dhe teachers ae sity of negligence and therefore lable forthe death of Perdinand, (1) Ave the dofandante guy of negligence? (2) IeArtiei 2180 appiocle to this eas? (9) Ate the amards of exemplary and moral damages proper? HELD: ON THE ISSUK OF NECLICENCK — Tas asheol and the ‘twschers are no: EUly of negligence. Inthe cae at har, tho teacher! pitners were notin the actual performance of thor signed {asks The incident happened not within the sed premises, pot on ‘tchocl day and mact importantly, while the teechore and sldenta ‘wore halite purely private alla splenic The nedoas happened ‘he some members ef te clas ofthe seeal were having = Pinic AL the beach The plenle had no permit from the sehoo! head ta ‘Principal because ths pale was aol a schoo-eanchoned etiity Deithr sit eonsidered av an entr-crriculareeiity Mare knowlodge by potitioneriprincipal of the planaing of the picnic bythe stadents and this tncane does not im anyway sw [oqulaseonee or eonaent tthe hokting ofthe same.The aplieation therefore of Article 2180 las na bass in law aad nether ff supported hy any jurisprudence If we mere aim the ndings ot the appellate cour on this coro, employers wal forever be expeced ta the risk ant danger of beng hallo t Court te anewer for the _miadeeds br omissions ofthe empnees even fh ater cniasion ‘becumalted while they were notin tho performance of thelr dies ‘No negligence ovuld bo attributable to the teachers to warrant the award of damages te Fordinand’s parents. The clase adviser ofthe elas where Pertinand belonged did hae beet and enero Qnigonce of & goed father pf fnmy to prevent any untoward Incident or damages to all the students who joined the pile. fn Paty sbe lvitd the PE. dastrators aad scot masters whe have Kowledge in rsd application and avizaminge Morcover, the Dutitoner brought hfe sevore in eave of emergones. Petitioner di ‘what ie hamanly possble tose the il 1e-was held thatthe Cour of Appeals ommitied an error In apply Article 2160 ofthe Gavi Cd in cendering the eboo] abe farthedoath of Ferdinand. ON THE ISSUE OF AWARDING MORAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES — No meral or exemplary damages may he awarded in vor of Fereinan's pareats. Tho case does not fall under any of tho grounds to grant moral damayes.Petlonery are aot gully of any faut or nelieace. Hence, no more damages fan be asessed ena ther, While i is tre that Reedinand’s parents gave thelr eanseat to their sn to join the piene this doos not men that petoners ‘wore already rlloved oftiee dy to observe the required gence (fa good father of a fail in ensuring the safety of he children, Ba here, peliteners were able o prove that they hed exercied that required igence Hone, the claim for moral or oxemplary Aamages beomos bueeos MAJORITY OPINION — ‘The majertty opinion hells the view thatthe ieachers Involved were notin the atual perfurmance Df dein assigned tasks, ence, any acto» omission caused by them Cannot bind thei employer &, Pranes High shed DISSENTING OPINION — Justice Padilla. dissented He maintained thet although the excision may not have boon attended by the appropriate school authorities, the preseace oF ‘tarmp of authority af the eckcol nevertbules porvaded by rearon ot ‘he participation of ot of eno bat of several tauchors, ‘MANDARIN VILLA, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL, ‘GR No, 119886, Je 2, 1096 PRINCIPLE: THE TEST FOR DETERMINING THE EXISTENCE OP. NEGLIGENCE INA PARTICULAR CASE MAY BE STATED AS. FOLLOWS “DID THE DKFRNDANT IN DOING ‘THE ALLEGKD NEGLIGENT ACT USE THE REASONABLE CARE AND CAUTION WHICHAN ORDINARY PRUDENT MAN WOULD HAVE USED IN THE SAME SITUATION. If NOT, "THEN HE IS GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE.” FACTS: ‘Att. Cano De Jos beta inner Sri finds at Misia Vie Seto Vilage, Gres, Muadsayen Gx eo aber 10, 1000. Ata he ser ihe nln heel i hi oe Sil in Gnont of B2658 60, Ay, Do ent gare hs Benerd {othe wniter whe goo fo th asr fr eran Three {he water ime Ae. be sey tat srt cada ese ‘Nig De dover emerald that rel car hd oe ane ox September hoon onan aos ‘Secompater version Tho sme infrmaton var shown CAND EREIRED Aly De dena anus gents co sr ean {iis encore, Pot Lie nae gust. ured the flare ‘nah Cody ering Catan De feats ay pole a ‘ids tatengong machen na hand ne png? Therese, De $e a A Spe a Co a Eid pep tht Ml Theos imeed od nope by He ‘cashier after verification. es De Je fled ce i mages, Aer al udgmen was ‘rendered es follows: oe 1. Paton a Rank shal pay, nly and mverly, ese (0 550 000" anlage: F100) ee ‘ilny dnmagr sn) FOOD ue fray se ss hat enc Tn was med by the Cor eye IS reddeg mcr! tags to F500, veseng xa imnage tio. 00 Da ating ae atau ISSUES: ‘Nandarin raises thse issues: (2) Whether it i nlioat (2) negligent, whether ouch negligence is Une proximate cause of De ‘eeu damage? HELD: "Tho Suprome Court affirmed the dacision of tho Court of ‘Appeals. A. Wheacver the words CARD EXPIRED fishes on the cere’ of the verfeation’prodence, petitloner stuuld chet the ‘dir ard expiration date eorkorsod onthe oarditeif approved, petitcner should honor tho card provdod i i nt invalid, careelles Er etoerviss suspended. But xpived, petitioner shoald net honor the cord In tit cat, De Jesus Bankcard Credit Card has an feraboned expiring date of September 1990 Clearly ii nol expired tn Ouieber 19, 1869, won Use samt was wrongly dishenored by the petitioner. Here tho pottioner di oo use the reasonable care {tnd soutien which an ordinary person would have usod inthe same ‘tution, and each petitioner Eu & nerisence. 2, While se tru that De Jer did ot have ouficlent cash on hand wv bs bate dinner ot potions rstaaeant, this fact Sons aid not oonsttate neglignco om is pert, whethr it xn be Slated thet the mame ie the primate canse of De Jesus damage, We take jndieal netioe of the common practice ainons, major betablistments,petiner Incudel, wo aceptyeyinent by means of trediteaeds ine fea, 8, ‘The hamiliation and aubarreeement of Do Jesus wat brought about ot bythe rem of Prot Lire us by the fk of fisnonor hy the petiioner of De Jesus’ valid BANKCARD credit ard fatal, the remarcof Pref Lirog served only to agerarate the fembarrement then fel by De desu PERLA COMPANIA DE SEGUROS, INC. ZT AL. v. SPS. (GUADENCIA SARANGAYA I, BT AL. "GR, No. 147746, Oot. 35, 2006 PRINCIPLE: REQUISITES 10 SUSTAIN THE ALLEGATION (OF NEGLIGENCE BASED ON THE DOCTRINE (OF RES IPSA LOQUITUR. (2) REQUISITES FOR BxeNPTING CIRCUNSTANCES OF C480 PORTUITO wacTs: Spouses Gusdeacls Seraageye I snd Primitive Sarengnya cceled build kaown an "Super A Busing,” a cemi-conere, Seminasra onestorey commersial balding fronting the provreal ‘oud of Santiogo,Iaboln It was subdivided into three doors ech ‘fich wns lease. The Z-stoey readence of the Sarangayas was ‘ehind the seen und third dao the baling, In 1008, petitioner leased tho frat. dor of tho “Super A Duilding It rnovated rented opuco and divided it nto two. The1ef side serve asa oie and the right side was used by Pascual, Brunch menager of pattencr ae a garage fra 1981 taodel door Ford Cortina, a company prvicedear- One dey, afterone of rps ePempanga, he decided to" warm up thocar. Waen he switehed the ty, the engino made an "ode sound a did wot start He sacked the ear again. This time, the angina was revived, bat he henrd a, ‘unusual sound. He then saw small Game coming ot of the engine. Startled, ho tured it of alighted fiom the vehicle and stad to Dash it out fm the garage when soddenly, re apewed out of te ear compartment and engulf the whole garage. He was trapped. inside and sulfored burae inhi ose, legs td asta ‘At the time, the respondents wore busy watching television ‘Much Inte, fire epread inside Wir house, devtevying all thee ‘belongings, furnisur, and appliances The, City fre marshall condactod an savestigation and ubenite a report to the provincial fire marshal Ut ibe fre was “eceidental” and that petitioner had no firs part ae required by aw. ‘A criminal comploint fur Reckleas Impradence resulting to Damages in Preporty was fled against Psssval.Paitonor ‘oxporalion vas asad to pay P7,89200, inclusive of the valve of theemaordal building, ‘Respondents Spevses Sl a civil complaint based on yn delict agent petizoners for a "Sum of Money and. Damage lleging that Pascual acted ‘with groao negligence while the ‘ettoner corporation lack the eave ligence inthe slecion ted supervision of Pascual as its employe, During tho trial respondents prsertad witnesses who testified tafe days before the inert, Pasetal was aeen baying pasoine from a nomby gus statin, He thn placd the coelacr ia the reat ‘ampartrent ef the ear Pascual insisted Ghat dhe fire was purely an accident, ato ortuite, hance, he wae not Hable for damage. Pottoner corporat esd ability forthe acesdnt on the ground that iexnetnd de Aligene oa ged father of family in the selection and wupervision| ‘of Paacial seta Branch Manegnr. ‘The tral court raed in favor ofthe respondent. wae afi 1 the CA with modeation as wo the svar of eamages Hence this petition. 1s8UE: 1 Pascual nogligent? Ts the nedent a ease oo fertuaits? HELD: (To sustain the alization of negtizenes based on the Aoctine of ea pea loguitor, the following requisites must neu @) The accident ia oa kind which doesnot ordinarily oncurdaleessomenne is nepigent ©) The cause ofthe injury wae under tho exlasve contol of the prsan in dharge ad (©) The injury must not have bees due fo eny voluntary aston er contebation on tho part of tho porn injured. Under the ist requis, the ooaurence must be one that does aot ordinarily oer unlewsthere is negligence. “Ordinary” refers ‘ho woueleoure of vente. Flames spewing et of «ear ongine,whow ‘tis switch on, i obviously not @rarmal event, Neither aoe explosion suslly oecur when a ea engine is revived. Hence in thi ase, without any direct eridencs ns to Uh case ofthe acidan, the doctrine res ie guitar eomos inte play, nd from it, We draw the inferenes that based onthe evidence on hand, senuoone was in fact nopligent end responsible far Ue acidoat Here, the fact that Paseal a th cariskor of the car failed ‘o submit any prot that he had it periodically checked (as its Year- ‘Rodel wn condition required) revenlel his noglgencs. A prudent ‘nan should have knoum thats L-yearold car constanly toed fe provincial trips, war defntaly prone to damage and other defects For fallare w prove care and diligence in the malatenance of the ‘rahicle, the necanaryinforonco a thet Pascal ad been negligent Inthe upkeep af the car (2) The exempting czcumstance of o2ay fortuito may be veiled only (@)_ When the eause ofthe unforssesn and unexpestad ‘oourteade was independent ofthe hua wil (6) Whom it was impossible to foesoe the evont which instituted the case fertaio of, 1 1 eld be Toresorn, 1 Wak Iimpomible ts aveids,(©). When the currence must be such as to render It ‘mpeouible to perform an cligation io «oral ane sed (2) When the pers tesked te perform the obligation rust not have perpated im the cours of eemduct that sggravated the ecient ‘ho circamatansee or record do net support the defense of Paseval. Clearly, thore was no cave fortitobesaueo of his want of fee al prsfence in meintaming the ca Under the secon requisite the instrumentality or ageney thst lsiggerd the occaroace mat be ene that falls under Ube eauaive control ef the porson in chango there I this ease, the ar Whore the fre originated wa undor tbe ctrl af Pascual Unier the third requisite, ther is nothing in the reords 10 show tha! repondente ombributed vo the incident. Taey aad 0 fsscs otha car nd had no reaponabilty sogarding is mimenance fren if was parkad in balding thay owned, Chapter XIV POLITICAL LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION OF ‘THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES PART! BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFINITION DEFINITION AL POLITICALLAW Police inna branch ofjacisredence which treaty ofthe ‘once of pais, the organization of gpveramont. (Back Law Dietionarg. Sith Paton, 1158) ur Supreme Court defied politcal ia more spciiterms ‘by saying that i othe branch of public Iw which dea wit the ‘organization and operation of the goveramentl gone of the este fd efines the relation of the state with the maitants of is territory. People. Porito, 43 Pht. 857, 1 PHILIPPINE POLITICAL LAW Philippine Politica! Lav, onthe oles and, deal specifically with heats ofthe structive snd powers afour government ewe fs th study of Constitutional Law, Administretve Law, Election Tam, Lew of Public Ofers, dae Law on Municipal Corporations, all ef yhish are covered by and ineuded inthe stad of Phil ppine Political Law C. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 1 ie study of the laws that regulate the administrative crgerizeticn end operation ofthe goversmental rpunscf the State {nd determines the sompetonce of the admiistretve suthortiee fad the remedies aval to aa indica in case of velaton af His righ D. ELECTION LAW tis study ofthe laws, rules, and procedures involving the comdect of slesticn of all pablicolfesla who will exercise the