De La Salle University

COLLEGE OF LAW

List of Cases in TORTS and DAMAGES

1st Semester 2017-2018

Course Description - An analysis of the law on quasi-delict as well as

the nature, classes and extent of damages.
References - New Civil Code Arts 2176-2235
Torts and Damages by: Prof. TIMOTEO B. AQUINO
2013, Rex Printing Corp.
And the following cases:

PART I
1. Naguiat vs. NLRC, 269 SCRA 564
2. Albenson Enterprises Corp. vs. CA, 217 SCRA 16
3. PNB vs. CA, 83 SCRA 237
4. Deywalt vs. La Corporacion de los Padres Agustinos Recoletos, G.R. No.
13505, 39 Phil. 587
5. Silva vs. Peralta, 110 Phil 57
6. Safeguard Security Agency, Inc. vs. Tangco, G.R. No. 165732, Dec. 14,
2006
7. Lamis vs. Ong, G. R. No. 148923, August 11, 2005
8. Elcano vs. Hill, 77 SCRA98
9. Virata vs. Ochoa, 81 SCRA 472
10. Andamo vs. CA 191 SCRA 195
11. Dulay vs. CA, April 31, 1995
12. Wylie vs. Rarang, 209 SCRA 327
13. Manila Railroad vs. Compania Transatlantica, 38 Phil. 875
14. Gashem Shoolent Baksh vs. CA, 219 SCRA 115
15. Phoenix Construction, Inc. vs. IAC, 148 SCRA 353
16. Quisaba vs. Sta. Ines-Melale Veneer & Plywood, Inc., 58SCRA 771, Aug.
30, 1974
17. Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203 SCRA 126

1
 18. Perez vs. Pumar, 2 Phil. 682
19. Republic vs. de los Angeles, G. R. No. L-26112
20. Gilchrist v. Cuddy, 29 Phil 542

CHAPTER II - NEGLIGENCE
pp 27-50 - Read the discussion very carefully

Statutory basis and requisites

NCC Art. 1157

1. Sagrado Orden de Precadores vs. Nacoco, 91 Phil. 503

2. Navales vs. Rios, 8 Phil. 508

Art. 2176
Requisites

3. Taylor vs. Manila Electric Co., 19 Phil 8

4. Gregorio vs. CA, G.R. No. 1979799, Sept. 11, 2009
5. Corinthian Gardens Association, Inc. vs. Tanjangco, G.R. No.
160795, June 27,2008
6. American Express vs. Cordero, G.R. No. 138550, October 14, 2005
7. Peter Paul Patrick Lucas vs. Dr. Prospero Ma. C. Tuano, G.R. No.
178762, April 21 2009
8. Garcia, Jr. vs. Salvador, G.R. No. 168512, March 20, 2007
9. Air France vs. Carrascoso, G.R. No. L-21438, Sept. 28, 1966
10. Petrophil Corp. vs. CA, G.R. No. 122796, December 10, 2001
11. Receiver for North Negros Sugar vs. Ybanez, 24 SCRA 979
12. Garcia Rueda vs. Pascasio, G.R. No. 118141, Sept. 5, 1997
13. Cruz vs. CA, 282 SCRA 188
14. Rakes vs. AG&P, 7Phil. 359
15. Barredo & Garcia vs. Almario, 73 Phils. 607
16. FEBTC vs. CA, 240 SCRA348

Concurrence of causes of action;

No double recovery - Art. 2177

2
 17. Loadmaster Customs Service, Inc. vs. Glodel Brokerage Corp. G.R.
No. 179446, Jan. 10, 2011
18. Santos vs. Pizzaro, G.R. No. 151452, July 29, 2005
19. Equitable Leasing vs. Suyom, G.R. NO. 143360, Sept. 5, 2002
20. Layugan vs. IAC, 167 SCRA 363

PART III
1. NIA vs. IAC, 214 SCRA 35
2. Civil Aeronautics Administration v. CA
Doctrine of last fair chance - antecedent negligence by plaintiff; the law is
that the person who has the last fair chance to avoid the impending harm and fails
to do sois chargeable with the consequences without reference to the prior
negligence of the other party
3. Picart vs. Smith

Diligence of a good father of a family - what should be determined in

negligence cases is what is foreseeable to a good father of a family;

Good father of a family is likewise referred to as reasonable man; man of ordinary

prudence and intelligence or ordinary reasonable prudent man

What a prudent man is expected to do

4. PLDT vs. CA, G.R. No. 57079, September 29, 1989
5. The Heirs of Redentor Completo vs. Albayda, Jr., G.R. No. 172200,
July 6, 2010

R.A. 9344, Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, see Sec. 4 - minimum
age of criminal responsibility

6. Jarco Marketing vs. CA, G.R. 129792, December 21, 1999

Teachers negligence
7. Federico Ylarde vs. Eduardo Aquino, 163SCRA 697
Physical handicap in determining the required degree of care
8. Francisco vs. Chemical Bulk Carriers, Inc., G.R. No. 193577,
September 9, 2011

3
 9. U.S. vs. Bonifacio, 34 Phils. 65
10. Roberts vs. State of Louisiana, 396 So., 2d566
Skills and reasonable degree of diligence
11. Far Eastern Shipping vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30

High degree of care is required of someone who has in his control an instrument
that is dangerous such as weapons and substances

12. Culion Ice, Fish & Electric vs. Phil. Motors Corp., 55 Phil. 129
13. Pacis vs. Morales, G.R. No. 169467, February 25, 2010

Intoxication
14. E.M. Wright vs. Manila Electric, G.R. No. 7760, October 1, 1914

Standards are the legal norms

15. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. vs. Goodman, 275 U.S. 66, 48 Sup. Ct. 24
16. Pokora vs. Wabash Ry. Co., 292 U.S. Sup. Ct. 580
17. Preciolita Corliss vs. Manila Railroad, 27 SCRA 674
18. Cipriano vs. CA, 263 SCRA, 711

Proximate cause - that cause which in natural and continuous sequence,

unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produced the injury, and without
which, the result would not have occurred.

19. Honoria Delgado Vda de Gregorio vs. Go Chong Bing, 102 Phil. 556

Practice and custom

1. S.D. Martinez vs. William Van Buskirk, G.R. No. L-5691, Dec. 27, 1910

Gross negligence - Art. 2231

Want of even slight care and diligence
2. Chan, Jr. vs. Iglesia ni Cristo, Inc., G.R. 160283, Oct. 14, 2005
3. Negros Navigation vs. CA, G.R. No. 110398, Nov. 7, 1997

Evidence; use of expert

4. Mercury Drug vs. Huang, G.R. No. 172122, June 22, 2007

Article 2184; 2185; 2188

4
 5. Guillang vs. Bedania, G.R. No. 162087, May 21, 2009

Res Ipsa Loquitor

6. Layugan vs. IAC, 167 SCRA 376
7. Rogelio Ramos v. CA, G.R. No. 124354, December 29, 1999
8. D.M. Consunji, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 137873, April 20, 2001
9. Africa vs. Caltex, G.R. No. 12986, March 31, 1966
10.Batiquin vs. CA, 258 SCAR 334
11. FGU Insurance vs. G.P. Sarmiento Trucking, G.R. No. 141910, Aug. 6,
2002

Chapter III
Affirmative duties

Nature of misfeasance and non-feasance

12. Ayers vs. Hicks, 220 Ind., 86, 40 N.E. 2d 334 (Indiana) 1942

Duty to rescue
Cf Art. 275 NCC;
Land Transportation and Traffic Code, RA 4136, Sec. 55
13. Santiago vs. de Leon, CA-G.R. No. 16180-R, March 21, 1960
14. Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483
15. Dangwa vs. CA, 202 SCRA 575
Attractive nuisance

16. Hidalgo Enterprises vs. Balndan, 91 Phils 488

Liability of proprietors of buildings

Art. 2190; 2191

17. Ollendorf vs. Abrahamson, 38 Phils. 585

18. Araneta vs. de Joya, 57 SCRA 59

Part V

1. Duty of physician, degree of care - a physician is bound to

serve the interest of his patients with the greatest solicitude, giving always his best

5
talent and skill - Dr. Victoria Batiquin and Allan Batiquin vs. CA, 258 SCRA
334
2. In criminal cases under Art. 365, the civil action arising from the
delict is deemed instituted - Dr. Ninevetch Cruz vs. CA, 285 SCRA 188
3. Requisites for liability based on quasi-delict in malpractice suits -
elements: duty; breach; injury; proximate causation - Cayao-Lasam vs.
Sps Ramolete, G.R. No. 159132, December 18, 2008
4. Duty of care - exercise that degree of care, skill and diligence
which physicians in the same general neighborhood and in the same general line of
practice ordinarily possesses and exercises in like case - Sps. Flores vs. Sps.
Pineda, G.R. No. 158996, November 14, 2008
5. Standard of care - the amount of competence associated with
the proper discharge of the profession; duty to use at least the same level of care
that any other reasonably competent doctor would use to treat a condition under the
same circumstances - Garcia-Rueda vs. Pascasio, G.R. No. 118141,
Sept. 5, 1997
6. Standard of care observed by other members of the profession in good
standing under similar circumstances bearing in mind the advanced state of the
profession at the time of treatment or the present state of medical science - Reyes
vs. Sisters of Mercy Hospital, G.R. No. 130547, October 3, 2000
7. Negligence; captain of the ship doctrine - the doctor arrived
3 hours late - Ramos vs. CA, 321 SCRA 584
8. Judicial notice e.g. laws of nature - Atienza vs. Board of
Medicine, G.R. No. 177407, Feb. 9, 2011
9. Informed consent - Dr. Rubi Li vs. Sps. Soliman, G.R. No. 165279,
June 7, 2011
10. Liability of hospitals - liability of hospitals as employer; respondeat
superior (Civil Code 2176 in rel to 2180) - Professional Services, Inc. vs. Agana,
G.R. No. 126297, February 2, 2010
11. Corporate responsibility - Manila Doctors Hospital vs. So Un
Chua, G.R. No. 150355, July 31, 2006
12. Liability of nurses, pharmacists, clinical laboratories - Mercury
Drug vs. Judge de Leon, G.R. No. 165622, Oct. 17, 2008

Negligence of other business organizations

13. Liability of school based on contract - PSBA vs. CA, 209 SCRA
47
14. Negligence of schools and school administrators - Child Learning
Center vs. Tagario, G.R. No. 150920, Nov. 25, 2005
6
 15. Security agency and guards - Safeguard Security Agency vs.
Tangco, G.R. No. 165732, Decemebr 14, 2006
16. Resort and swimming pool operator - Ong vs. Metropolitan
Water District, 104 Phils. 398
17. Theater - Gotesco Investment Corp. vs. Chatto, G.R. No. L-
87584, June 16, 1992
18. Building contractor - Juan Nakpil and Sons vs. CA - G.R.
No. L-47851, and L-47896, Oct. 3, 1986
19. Towage - Cargolift Shipping vs.L. Actuario Marketing, G.R.
No. 146426, June 27, 2006

PART VI
1. Intent in Tort - Dart Phils. vs. Sps. Calogcog, G.R. No.
149241, August 24, 2009

2. Read Articles 19, 20, and 21

3. No exemplary damages because there is good faith - Grand

Union Supermarket, Inc. vs. Espino, Jr., G.R. No. L-48250, Dec. 28, 1979

4. Elements of Abuse of Right - Albenson Enterprises vs. CA,

G.R. No. 88694, January 11, 1993

5. Concept of Abuse of Right - Carpio vs. Valmonte -G.R.

No.151866, September 9, 2004

6. Example of Abuse of Right by a school - UE vs. Jader, G.R.

No. 132344, Feb. 17, 2000

[skip the rest of the discussion on the examples of abuse of rights]

Breach of good morals, good custom, public order & public policy
7. Breach of promise to marry - Bunag, Jr. vs. CA, 211 SCRA
4441

8. Promise to marry, attended with fraud - Gashem Shookat

Baksh vs. CA, G.R. No. 97336, February 19, 1993

7
 [skip the other discussions and go to:]

9. Malicious prosecution - Manila Gas vs. CA, G.R. No. L-

44190, October 30, 1980

Chapter 9 - HUMAN DIGNITY

Read Article 26 of the Civil Code
Bill of Rights: Secs. 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, and 17
10. Privacy - Blas Ople vs. Ruben Torres, G.R. No. 127685,
July 23, 1998

Intrusion in the Internet - Read Electronic Commerce Act, Sec. 31

and Anti-Voyeurism Act, RA 9995, Secs. 3-7

Skip the discussions and go to:

11. 2nd par. of Art. 26 of the Civil Code - Jose Cordero et al. vs.
Alicia B. Buigasco, G.R. No. 34130-R, April 17, 1972

12. Sexual Harassment as discrimination - Dr. Rico S. Jacutin vs.

People of the Phils., G.R. No. 140604, March 6, 2002

PART VII

Chapter 10 - INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION

Article 32 - liability for damages for violation of certain rights

(19) under the Constitution

1. Newsound Broadcasting Network vs. Dy, G.R. No. 170270 and

179411, April 2, 2009
2. Delfin Lim and Jikil Taha vs. Francisco Ponce de Leon et al., G.R.
No. 22554, August 29, 1975
3. Meralco vs. SPS. Chua, G. R. No. 160422, July 5, 2010
4. MPH Garments, Inc. vs Court of Appeals, 236 SCRA 227

8
 Article 33 - separate civil action for damages in cases of
defamation, fraud and physical injuries

Definition of LIBEL - Article 353 of the RPC

5. MVRS Publications vs. Islamic Dawah Council of the Phils., G.R.

No. 135306, January 28, 2003
6. Alfonso Yuhangco vs. The Manila Chronicle, G. R. No. 184315,
Nov. 25, 2009
7. Ramos vs. CA, G.R. No. 120715, March 29, 1996
8. Guingguing vs. CA, G.R. No. 128959, Sept. 30, 2005

Doctrine of Fair Comment -

9. Borjal vs. CA, G.R. No. 126466, January 14, 1999

10. On reckless imprudence - Corpuz vs. Paje, G.R.

No. 26737, July 31, 1969

Article 34 - failure or refusal by the police to render aid

and protection in case of danger to life or property; city or
municipality is subsidiarily liable

11. Madeja vs. Caro, 126 SCRA 293

Read and understand Tolentinos and Justice Caguioas

comments on pp. 578-579

Chapter 11 - CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM DELICT

1. Banal vs. Tadeo, 156 SCRA 325

Article 100 of the RPC - Every person criminally liable for a

felony is also civilly liable

9
 What are included in the civil liability - Restitution,
Indemnification, Reparation - Articles 105, 106, 107 RPC

2. Anita Tan vs. Standard Vacuum Oil, 91 Phils. 672

Article 2177 of the Civil Code - plaintiff cannot recover twice

for the same act or omission

Articles 29, 30, and 31 of the Civil Code

3. Casupanan vs. Mario Llavore Laroya, G.R. No. 145391, August 26,
2002
4. What is a prejudicial question?

PART VIII

Chapter 12 - The Defendants (persons who may be sued for tort)

Article 2194
LoadmasterCustom Services, Inc. vs. Glodel Brokerage Corp., G. R. No.
179446, January 10, 2011
Worcester vs. Ocampo, 22 Phils. 42
Allied Banking Corp. vs. Lim Sio Wan et al., G.R. No. 133179, March 27,
2008
Article 2184 - owner is solidarily liable with driver
Chapman vs. Underwood, 27 Phils. 374

Respondeat superior - employer is liable for the act or omission of

his employer - employer cannot escape liability by claiming that he
exercised due diligence in the selection or supervision of the employee; in the
Phils., vicarious liability is generally not governed by the doctrine of respondeat
superior
When respondeat superior is applicable: Articles 2180 to 2182 of the Civil
Code; Articles 58 and 201 of PD 603; Art. 2190; 221; 236 of the Family Code of
the Phils.

Vicarious liability arising from delict - Articles 101 to 103 of the RPC
Liability for acts of minors - Fuellas vs. Cadano, G.R. No. 14409,
October 31, 1961

10
 Children 15 years and below - Libi vs. IAC, 214 SCRA 16
Over 15 but below 18 - cf Sec 5, A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC
Below 21 - Salen et al., vs. Balce,
Liability of guardians of incapacitated adults - Articles 38 and 39
of the of the Civil Code
Liability of schools - St. Francis High School vs. CA, 194 scra
314
Aquinas School vs. Sps. Inton, G.R. No. 184 202, January 26, 2011
Jose Amadora vs. CA, G.R. No. L-47745, April 15, 1988

Employer-employee relationship - control test

LVN Pictures, Ins. Vs. Phil. Musicians Guild G.R. Nos. L-12582 and 12598
Labor only contracting - NPC vs. CA, 294 SCRA 209
Presumption of employers negligence - RCJ Bus Line, Inc. vs.
Standard Insurance Co., Inc., G.R. No. 193629, August 12, 2011
Defense of employer - Heirs of Reinoso vs. CA, G.R. No. 116121,
July 18, 2011
Liability of the registered owner of vehicle - Gaudioso Erezoet
al., vs. Aguedo Jepte, G.R. No. L-9605, Septemebr 30, 1957
Valenzuela vs. CA, 253 SCRA 303
Sps. Bernabe Africa vs. Caltex Phils, et al., G.R. No. L-12986, March 31,
1966

Liability of partnership - Articles 1822 and 1823 of the Civil Code

State liability - Art. 2180 of the Civil Code

Government-owned or controlled corporation - PNR vs. IAC, 217
SCRA 637
Municipal Corporations - Article 2189 of the Civil Code
Guilatco vs. City of Dagupan, G. R. No. 61516, March 21, 1989
Quezon City Government vs. Dacara, G.R. No. 150304, June 15, 2005

PART IX

Chapter 13 - Strict Liability

Liability for damages caused by animals
Art. 2183: Vestil vs. IAC G.R. No. 74431, Nov. 6, 1989
Falling objects
Art. 2193: Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 73 Phil. 14

11
 Liability of employers - Art. 1711

Nuisance
Art. 694 - definition
P.D. 856 Code of Sanitation of the Phils., Sec. 85 - what are nuisances
Kinds - public or private - Art. 695
Nuisance per se - Homeowners Association of El Deposito,
Barrio Corazon de Jesus, San Juan Rizal vs. Lood, 47 SCRA
174
Perez vs. Sps. Madrona, G.R. No. 184478, March 21, 2012
Nuisance per accidens - Salao vs. Santos, 67 Phils. 550
Abatement - Arts. 699 to 707 of the Civil Code
Bengzon vs. Prov. of Pangasinan, 62 Phils. 816
Sec. 9 of the Fire Code - just give a summary
Environmental protection - Velasco vs. Manila Electric, 40
SCRA 342, citing the basic principles laid down in Tortorella
vs. Traiser & Co., Inc.
Unjust enrichment - Art. 22 of the Civil Code - action
in rem verso

Chapter 14 - Product and Service Liability

Fraud or misrepresentation
Fraud under the Consumer Act - Art. 50 - deceptive
practices
Warranty against hidden defects - Arts. 1561 to 1570 of the Civil
Code
Virgilio del Rosario et al., vs. Court of Appeals and Metal Forming Corp.,
G.R. No. 118325, Jan. 29, 1997 - privity between plaintiff
and defendant is not necessary before liability can be imposed for
breach of warranty given to the public
Duration of warranty - Isidro vs. Nissan Motor Philippines, Inc.,
G.R. No. 136500, December 3, 1999
Enforcement of warranty
Breach of express warranty
Breach of implied warranty

Negligence in the manufacture of products - Coca-Cola Bottlers

Phils., Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 110295, Oct. 18, 1993
Strict liability under the Civil Code

12
 Art. 2187 : Escola vs. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 150 P. 2d 436, Cal.
(1944)
Strict liability under the Consumer Act - Art. 97 of the Consumer
Act - liability for defective products; Art. 98 - liability for defective
service
Test under the Consumer Act - when is a product defective?
Malfunction doctrine - Under US laws
Defenses by manufacturer, builder, producer or importer - Art. 97

PART X

Chapter 15 - Business Torts

Art. 1314 - Any third person who induces another to violate his
contract shall be liable for damages to the other contracting party.
Interference with contractual relations Lagon vs. CA, G.R. No. 119107,
March 18, 2005; brief discussion of Lumley vs. Gye and Gilchrist vs. Cuddy
Tayag vs. Lacson, G.R. No. 134971, March 25, 2004
Philip Yu vs. CA, G.R. No. 86683, January 21, 1993

Legal justification - if the defendant acts to promote the interest of

others or himself and if the interest which he seeks to advance is superior to the
interest invaded in social importance. - Daywalt vs. La Corporatcion de los
Padres Agustinos, 39 Phil 587
So Ping Bun vs. CA, G.R. 120554, Sept. 21, 1999 - not legal
justification
Extent of liability Allan C. Go vs. Cordero, G.R. No. 164703 and 164704,
May 4, 2010

Unfair competition - Art. 186 of RPC

Intellectual Property Code, Sec. 168
Monopolies and predatory pricing Gokongwei vs. SEC, G.R. No. L-45911,
April 11, 1979; Garcia vs. Corona, 321 SCRA 218
Securities related fraud Securities Regulation Code, Sec 28; Sec. 57 civil
liability in connection with prospectuses, communications and reports

Chapter 16 - Damages
Indemnity proportionate to fault Simona Manzanares vs. Rafael Moreta ,
G.R. 1230, Oct. 22, 1918

13
 Damnum Absque Injuria there is no liability even if there is damage
because there is no injury Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483; Farolan vs. Salmac
Marketing Corp., G.R. No. 83589, March 13, 1991

Damages Art. 2197 of the Civil Code

Kinds of actual damages :
Loss of what a person already possesses dao emgrente
Failure to receive as a benefit what would have pertained to him -
Lucro cesante PNOC Shipping vs. CA, 297 SCRA 402
Extent of liability Art. 2202 crimes and quasi-delict
Damages for breach of contract Art. 2201
FGU Insurance vs. G. P. Sarmiento Trucking, 435 Phil. 333

Damage to property Optimum Motor Center vs. Tan, G. R. No. 170202,

July 14, 2008

Personal injury Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203 SCRA 126

Death Art. 2206 People vs. Tolentino, 546 SCRA 671

Loss of earning capacity formula for computation of award

Net earning capacity = life expectancy x gross annual income less necessary
Necessary living expenses Tamayo et al. vs. Senora, G.R. No.
176946, Nov. 15, 2010
Reduction in life expectancy multiplier Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC, 135
135 SCRA 242
Pp. vs. Gonzalez, Jr., G.R. No. 139542, June 21, 2001
Pp vs. Mayor Antonio l. Sanchez, G.R. Nos. 121039-45, Oct. 18, 2001
Loss of profits Consolidated Dairy Products vs. CA, 212 SCRA 810; G.A.
Machineries, Inc. vs. Yaptinchay, 126 SCRA 78

Attorneys fees Art. 2208

Award is for the party and not his counsel Quirante vs. IAC, G.R. No.
73886, Jan. 31, 1989
When compelled to litigate Benedicto vs. Villaflores, G.R. No. 185020,
Oct. 6, 2010
Interest on damages Arts. 2209 to 2013

Mitigation of Liability Arts. 2203 to 2204; 2214-2215

14
 Collateral source rule Art. 2207 Pedro J. Velasco vs. MERALCO, 40
SCRA 342;

Moral damages Art. 2217 2220 Keirluf vs. CA, 269SCRA 443
Expert Ravel and Tours, Inc., vs. Ricardo Lo, G.R. No. 130030, June 25,
1999
In labor cases damages is recoverable when dismissal of employee was
attended by bad faith or fraud SMC vs. Teodosio, 602 SCRA 197

Other kinds of damages:

Nominal Art. 2221 to 2223 Pleno vs. CA, G.R. No. 565o5, May 9, 1988
Termperate Art. 2224 Araneta vs. Bank of America, 40 SCRA 144
Liquidated Art. 2226 Tiu vs. Platinum Plans, Inc., G.R. No. 163512,
Feb. 28, 2007
Exemplary or punitive Cheng vs. Donini, 590 SCRA 406
Requisites for award of exemplary PNB VS. CA, 256 SCRA 44
Art. 2230 to 2235

Note: Additional new cases will be added as we go along.

ATTY. ANUNCIACION G. AYO

15