UNIVERSITY OF THE EAST vs. ROMEO A.

JADER
G.R. No. 132344 February 17, 2000

Facts:
Romeo Jader graduated at UE College of law from 1984-19988. During his last year, 1st
semester, he failed to take the regular final examination in Practical Court 1where he was given an
incomplete grade remarks. He filed an application for removal of the incomplete grade given by
Prof. Carlos Ortega on February 1, 1988 which was approved by Dean Celedonio Tiongson after
the payment of required fees. He took the exam on March 28, 1988 and on May 30, 1988 the
professor gave him a grade of 5.The commencement exercise of UE College of law was held April
16, 1988, 3PM. In the invitation, his name appeared. In preparation for the bar exam, he took a
leave of absence from work from April 20- Sept 30, 1988. He had his pre-bar class review in FEU.
Upon learning of such deficiency, he dropped his review classes and was not able to take the bar
exam. Jader sued UE for damages resulting to moral shock, mental anguish, and serious anxiety,
besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, and sleepless nights when he was not able to take the
1988 bar examinations due to UE’s negligence.

Issue:
Whether UE should be held liable for misleading a student into believing JADER satisfied
all the requirements for graduation when such is not the case. Can he claim moral damages?

Ruling:
Supreme Court held that petitioner was guilty of negligence and this liable to respondent for
the latter’s actual damages. Educational institutions are duty-bound to inform the students of their
academic status and not wait for the latter to inquire from the former. However, respondent should
not have been awarded moral damages though JADER suffered shock, trauma, and pain when he
was informed that he could not graduate and will not be allowed to take the bar examinations as
what Court of Appeals held because it’s also respondent’s duty to verify for himself whether he has
completed all necessary requirements to be eligible for the bar examinations. As a senior law student,
he should have been responsible in ensuring that all his affairs specifically those in relation with his
academic achievement are in order. Before taking the bar examinations, it doesn’t only entail a
mental preparation on the subjects but there are other prerequisites such as documentation and
submission of requirements which prospective examinee must meet. Wherefore, the assailed
decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed with modification. Petitioner is ordered to pay
respondent the sum of Thirty-five Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Pesos (P35,470.00), with legal
interest of 6% per annum computed from the date of filing of the complaint until fully paid; the
amount of Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) as attorney's fees; and the costs of the suit. The award
of moral damages is deleted.