Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Injuries. This charge arose from an Information which ISSUE/s: The sole issue in this case is whether or not the
states that sometime in August of 1982 at 4pm, Mayo was findings of the lower court justify the award of Php700k
driving a Philippine Rabbit bus along the McArthur as moral damages in favor of PR Navarette.
Hway in Mabalacat, Pampanga. Private respondent (PR)
Linda Navarette, on the other hand, was aboard a
Mitsubishi Lancer along with several others including SC RULING: To arrive at its Decision, the SC examined
two children. The Lancer was driven by June Navarette the records of the case and established that prior to the
and was cruising steadily at the right lane of the road accident, PR Navarette was an Economist by profession
while the Rabbit bus was trailing closely behind the and a graduate of BS Home Economics at UP. She was
Lancer. Behind the bus is a Tamaraw jeep. At first, the an Asst VP and Resident Manager of Club Solviento in
Tamaraw jeep was ahead, followed by the Lancer, and QC as well as a Food consultant receiving a gross income
behind it is the Rabbit bus, all travelling towards Manila. of Php17k. As a result of the accident, she suffered from
The Lancer as well as the Rabbit bus following one after a permanent partial facial disfigurement and total loss of
the other overtook the Tamaraw jeep. As the vehicles vision of her right eye which was replaced by a false eye.
approached the Mabalacat Institute, the Rabbit bus,
picked up speed and swerved to the left lane to overtake
the Lancer however an oncoming vehicle from the According to the doctor, PR Navarettes right eye could
opposite lane appeared and flashed its headlights to warn not be saved since the right eyeball needed to be removed
the Rabbit bus to give way. The Rabbit bus then suddenly as it was heavily lacerated and there was a necessity of an
swerved to the right in an effort to return to the correct artificial eye placement in the socket. Upon advice of her
lane and avoid collision with the oncoming vehicle. In the doctor in Makati Med, she had to go to San Francisco,
process however, it hit and bumped the left rear side of USA for further treatment. She went twice to San
the Lancer causing its driver to lose control of the wheel Francisco and incurred expenses around Php60k to 80k.
and it swerved across the left lane and hit a bystander then
crashed against a concrete fence of another person. The
Lancer was heavily damaged and the passengers
Furthermore, PR Navarette declared that she had a
including the driver sustained physical injuries in varying
boyfriend whom she lost after the accident. She broke
degrees.
down over the misfortune and placed a value of her
RTC RULING: Mayo was convicted and charged and mental, psychological, and moral sufferings in the
the civil aspect of the case was heard in the criminal case. amount of Php500k as moral damages and asked the
The complainants therein including PR Navarette were lower court to double the amount making it Php1M
awarded damages wherein the amount of moral damages stating as reason that her boyfriend would have been her
awarded to her was Php700,000.00 (while to others lifetime partner and her guide of her eye forever had she
ranged from 5k to 60k). not lost him.
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the granted. Loss of a boyfriend as a result of physical
following and analogous cases: injuries after an accident is not one of them. Neither can
it be categorized as an analogous case.
operator of a passenger bus, its employee, was private respondent was not the fault of petitioner
assigned as the regular driver of the bus. Suelto. We have reviewed the evidence on record and
2. At around 2:00 p.m. on October 3, 1992, Suelto find that petitioners failed to prove that petitioner
was driving the passenger bus along Kamias acted on an emergency caused by the sudden
Road, Kamuning, Quezon City, going towards intrusion of a passenger jeepney into the lane of the
EDSA. The bus suddenly swerved to the right bus he was driving.
and struck the terrace of the commercial
apartment owned by Valdellon. Upon
Valdellons request, the court ordered Sergio
Pontiveros, the Senior Building Inspection It was the burden of petitioners herein to prove
Officer of the City Engineers Office, to inspect petitioner Sueltos defense that he acted on an
the damaged terrace. emergency, that is, he had to swerve the bus to the
3. He recommended that since the structural right to avoid colliding with a passenger jeep coming
members made of concrete had been displaced, from EDSA that had overtaken another vehicle and
the terrace would have to be demolished "to keep intruded into the lane of the bus.
its monolithicness, and to insure the safety and
stability of the building." It is clear from the photographs submitted by the
4. In a letter addressed to the bus company and prosecution that the commercial apartment of Dr.
Suelto, Valdellon demanded payment of Valdellon sustained heavy damage caused by the bus
P148,440.00, within 10 days from receipt being driven by Suelto. "It seems highly improbable
thereof, to cover the cost of the damage to the that the said damages were not caused by a strong
terrace. he bus company and Suelto offered a impact. And, it is quite reasonable to conclude that,
P30,000.00 settlement which Valdellon refused. at the time of the impact, the bus was traveling at a
5. Valdellon filed a criminal complaint for reckless
high speed when Suelto tried to avoid the passenger
imprudence resulting in damage to property
jeepney."
against Suelto. After the requisite preliminary
investigation, an Information was filed with the The damages could not have been caused except by
RTC of Quezon City. a speeding bus. Had the accused not been speeding,
6. Valdellon also filed a separate civil complaint he could have easily reduced his speed and come to a
against Suelto and the bus company for damages.
full stop when he noticed the jeep. Were he more
She prayed that after due proceedings, judgment
be rendered in her favor. prudent in driving, he could have avoided the
ISSUE(S): incident or even if he could not avoid the incident,
the damages would have been less severe.
1. W/N Suelto is guilty of reckless imprudence
which resulted in the damage of Valdellons property The severe damages sustained could not have
resulted had the accused acted as a reasonable and
HELD: prudent man would. The accused was not diligent as
he claims to be. What is more probable is that the
1. Yes. Respondent People of the Philippines
was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt accused had to swerve to the right and hit the
that petitioner Suelto swerved the bus to the commercial apartment of the plaintiff because he
right with recklessness, thereby causing could not make a full stop as he was driving too fast
damage to the terrace of private respondents in a usually crowded street.
apartment.
Eastern Shipping Lines Inc. v. IAC,
RATIO:
Doctrine:
Although she did not testify to seeing the incident as
When a carrier fails to establish any caso fortuito, the
it happened, petitioner Suelto himself admitted this
presumption by law of fault or negligence on the part of
in his answer to the complaint and when he testified
the carrier applies.
in the trial court.
FACTS:
Suelto narrated that he suddenly swerved the bus to
the right of the road causing it to hit the column of Carrier Eastern Shipping Lines Inc
the terrace of private respondent. Petitioners were
burdened to prove that the damage to the terrace of
5
Shipper/Consignee Stresstek Post Tensioning Moreover, under Article 1733 of the Civil Code,
Philippines Inc common carriers are bound to observe "extra-ordinary
vigilance over goods . . . .according to all circumstances
Insurer - First Nationwide Assurance Corporation of each case," and Article 1735 of the same Code states,
to wit:
Arrastre Operator E. Razon Inc. (not significant)
Art. 1735. In all cases other than those mentioned
in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the preceding article, if
Eastern Shipping Lines Inc shipped uncoated 7-wire
the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated, common
stress relieved wire strand for prestressed concretewere
carriers are presumed to have been at fault or to have
shipped on board the vessel "Japri Venture,". Upon
acted negligently, unless they prove that they observed
arrival at the port of Manila, it discharged thecargo to the
extraordinary diligence as required in article 1733.
custody of the defendant E. Razon, Inc. from whom the
consignee's customs brokerreceived it for delivery to the Since the carrier has failed to establish any caso
consignee's warehouse. First Nationwide Assurance, fortuito, the presumption by law of fault or negligence on
indemnified theconsignee in the amount of P171,923.00 the part of the carrier applies; and the carrier must present
for damage and loss to the insured cargo, whereupon evidence that it has observed the extraordinary diligence
theformer was subrogated for the latter. The insurer now required by Article 1733 of the Civil Code in order
seeks to recover from the defendants what ithas to escape liability for damage or destruction to the goods
indemnified the consignee. The petitioner protested that it had admittedly carried in this case. No such
alleging that it should not be hel liable to evidence exists of record. Thus, the carrier cannot escape
liability.
answer for damages for the event that caused the rusting
of the goods was due to the encounteredvery rough seas The presumption, therefore, that the cargo was in
and stormy weather classified as force majeure, hence apparent good condition when it was delivered by the
relieving them of any liability. vessel to the arrastre operator by the clean tally sheets has
been overturned and traversed. The evidence is clear to
Aggrieved, respondent filed a case against petitioner.
the effect that the damage to the cargo was suffered while
RTC dismissed the case aboard petitioner's vessel.
CA set aside RTCs decision and ordered petitioner to BORJAL V COURT OF APPEALS
pay respondent
Facts: A civil action for damages based on libel was filed
ISSUE: before the court against Borjal and Soliven for writing
and publishing articles that are allegedly derogatory and
W/N petitioner was negligent and should be held liable offensive against Francisco Wenceslao, attacking among
for the payment of damages. others the solicitation letters he send to support a
HELD: conference to be launch concerning resolving matters on
transportation crisis that is tainted with anomalous
YES. Plainly, the heavy seas and rains referred to activities. Wenceslao however was never named in any
in the master's report were not of the articles nor was the conference he was organizing.
The lower court ordered petitioners to indemnify the
caso fortuito, but normal occurrences that an ocean-going
private respondent for damages which was affirmed by
vessel, particularly in the month of September which,
the Court of Appeals. A petition for review was filed
in our area, is a month of rains and heavy seas would
before the SC contending that private respondent was not
encounter as a matter of routine. They are not unforeseen
sufficiently identified to be the subject of the published
nor unforeseeable. These are conditions that ocean-going
articles.
vessels would encounter and provide for, in the ordinary
course of a voyage. That rain water (not sea water) found Issue: Whether or not there are sufficient grounds to
its way into the holds of the Jupri Venture is a clear constitute guilt of petitioners for libel.
indication that care and foresight did not attend the
closing of the ship's hatches so that rainwater would not
find its way into the cargo holds of the ship. Held: In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that
the victim be identifiable although it is not necessary that
6
he be named. It is also not sufficient that the offended is a reputable learning institution. With the supposed
party recognized himself as the person attacked or expose, FBNI, Rima and Alegre transmitted malicious
defamed, but it must be shown that at least a third person imputations and as such, destroyed plaintiffs reputation.
could identify him as the object of the libelous FBNI was included as defendant for allegedly failing to
publication. These requisites have not been complied exercise due diligence in the selection and supervision of
with in the case at bar. The element of identifiability was its employees. The trial court found Rimas statements to
not met since it was Wenceslaso who revealed he was the be within the bounds of freedom of speech and ruled that
organizer of said conference and had he not done so the the broadcast was libelous. It ordered the defendants
public would not have known. Alegre and FBNI to pay AMEC 300k for moral
damages.
The concept of privileged communications is implicit in
the freedom of the press and that privileged ISSUE:
communications must be protective of public
Whether or not AMEC is entitled to moral damages.
opinion. Fair commentaries on matters of public interest
are privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action RULING:
for libel or slander. The doctrine of fair comment means
that while in general every discreditable imputation A juridical person is generally not entitled to moral
publicly made is deemed false, because every man is damages because, unlike a natural person, it cannot
presumed innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and experience physical suffering or such sentiments as
every false imputation is deemed malicious, nevertheless, wounded feelings, serious anxiety, mental anguish or
when the discreditable imputation is directed against a moral shock. Nevertheless, AMECs claim, or moral
public person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily damages fall under item 7 of Art 2219 of the NCC.
actionable. In order that such discreditable imputation to This provision expressly authorizes the recovery of moral
a public official may be actionable, it must either be a damages in cases of libel, slander or any other form of
false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false defamation. Art 2219 (7) does not qualify whether the
supposition. If the comment is an expression of opinion, plaintiff is a natural or juridical person. Therefore, a
based on established facts, then it is immaterial that the juridical person such as a corporation can validly
opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it might complain for libel or any other form of defamation and
reasonably be inferred from the facts. claim for moral damages. Moreover, where the broadcast
is libelous per se, the law implied damages. In such a
case, evidence of an honest mistake or the want of
The questioned article dealt with matters of public character or reputation of the party libeled goes only in
interest as the declared objective of the conference, the mitigation of damages. In this case, the broadcasts are
composition of its members and participants, and the libelous per se. thus, AMEC is entitled to moral damages.
manner by which it was intended to be funded no doubt However, we find the award P500,000 moral damages
lend to its activities as being genuinely imbued with unreasonable. The record shows that even though the
public interest. Respondent is also deemed to be a public broadcasts were libelous, per se, AMEC has not suffered
figure and even otherwise is involved in a public issue. any substantial or material damage to its reputation.
The court held that freedom of expression is Therefore, we reduce the award of moral damages to
constitutionally guaranteed and protected with the P150k.
reminder among media members to practice highest
ethical standards in the exercise thereof.
Filipinas Broadcasting vs. Ago Medical Center v JOIN TORT FEASORS are all the persons who
command, instigate, promote, encourage, advice
FACTS: countenance, cooperate in, aid or abet the commission of
a tort, as who approve of it after it is done, for its benefit.
Rima & Alegre were host of FBNI radio program
Expose. Respondent Ago was the owner of the Medical
& Educational center, subject of the radio program
Expose. AMEC claimed that the broadcasts were
defamatory and owner Ago and school AMEC claimed
for damages. The complaint further alleged that AMEC