TORTS AND DAMAGES- DAMAGES

1. ONG v. CA RULING. NO. To be recoverable, actual damages must be

pleaded and proven in court. In no instance may the trial
Art. 2199. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one
judge ward more those pleaded and proven. Damages cannot
is entitled to an adequate compensation only for such
be presumed. The award thereof must be based on the
pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved.
evidence presented, not on the personal knowledge of the
 The fundamental principle of the law on damages is that court; and certainly not on flimsy, remote, speculative, and
one injured by a breach of contract or by a wrongful or nonsubstantial proof.
negligent act or omission shall have a fair and just
In the case at bar, petitioner failed to present evidence
compensation. (Ong v. CA)
regarding the feasibility or practicability and the cost of a
restorative medical operation on her arm. Thus, there is no
 Damages cannot be presumed. The award thereof must
basis to grant her P48,000 for such expense.
be based on the evidence presented, not on the personal
knowledge of the court; and certainly not on flimsy, The bare and unsubstantiated assertion of Francia that she
remote, speculative, and nonsubstantial proof. usually earned P200 a day from her market stall is not the best
evidence to prove her claim of unrealized income for the
 A person is entitled to the physical integrity of his or her eight-month period that her arm was in plaster cast. Her
body, and if that integrity is violated, damages are due and testimony that it was their lessor who filed their income tax
assessable—thus, the usual practice is to award moral returns and obtained business licenses for them does not
damages for physical injuries sustained. justify her failure to present more credible evidence of her
income. Furthermore, after her ten-day confinement at the
FACTS: Spouses Renato and Francia Ong (petitioners)
hospital, she could have returned to her work at the public
boarded a bus owned by Inland Trailways (Inland) under a
market despite the plaster case on her right arm, since she
lease agreement with Philtranco. During its transit in Tiaong,
claimed to have two nieces as helpers. Clearly, the appellate
Quezon, it met a fateful accident involving another vehicle
court was correct in deleting the award for unrealized income,
from Philtranco. Said accident made petitioners suffer
because of petitioners utter failure to substantiate her claim.
wounds and fractures, specifically, Renato Ong suffered
fractures on his right arm and left eye. 2. AIR FRANCE v. CA

Petitioners filed an action for damages against Philtranco and  Claimant must satisfactorily prove during the trial the
Inland. They alleged that they suffered injuries preventing existence of the factual basis of the damages and its causal
Francia from operating a sari-sari-store and Renato from connection to the defendant’s acts before an award of
continuing his work as an overseas contract worker. They damages.
claim, among others, moral and exemplary damages, with an  Mere refusal to accede to the passenger’s wishes does not
aggregate amount of P3-million. necessarily translate into damages in the absence of bad
faith.
Philtranco, on its defense, stated that under its lease
agreement with Inland, the latter would be solely liable for all FACTS: Private respondent Narciso Morales purchased an
claims and liabilities arising from the operation of said bus. airline ticket from petitioner thru its agent in Makati. The
Further, it alleged that it exercised the diligence of a good itinerary included several cities. While in Ney York, Morales
father of a family in the selection and supervision of its obtained 3 medical certificates which necessitated medical
drivers. Inland, on the other hand, answered that its driver treatment. In line with such medical situation, he requested to
exercised extraordinary diligence as testified to by its the petitioner that his flight be shortened. Air France made
passengers. arrangements to his demands, with its staff coordinating with
its Manila and its head office. Unfortunately, the request of
Trial Court rendered judgment in favor of the petitioners,
the respondent was denied. Respondent had to buy an
absolving Inland from any liability while making Philtranco
entirely new set of tickets.
solely liable for the damages claimed by the petitioners.
Upon arrival in Manila, respondent sent a complaint to Air
According to the trial court, the proximate cause of the
France thru the latter’s agent. He was advised to surrender
accident is the bumping from behind by the Philtranco bus.
the unused flight coupons for a refund, but instead, he filed a
As it failed to prove that it exercised due diligence in the
complaint for breach of contract of carriage and damages.
selection and supervision of its employees under Art. 2176,
Philtranco was held liable based on culpa aquiliana. CFI found Air France in evident bad faith for violation of the
contract of carriage, aggravated by the threatening attitude of
CA reversed the decision of the lower court, and found that
its employees in Hamburg. Further, it ordered petitioner to
petitioners sufficiently established a claim against Inland
pay for the new set of tickets Morales bought, P1-million as
based on culpa contractual. As a common carrier, Inland was
moral damages, and P800,000 as exemplary damages. CA
required to observe extraordinary diligence under the Civil
reduced the amount of damages to P500,000 and exemplary
Code. Its liability arose from its failure to transport its
damages to P150,000.
passengers and cargo safely. The appellate court also reduced
the award for actual and miscellaneous expenses, and the ISSUE: Whether or not there is a breach of contract of
award of P50,000 moral damages to P30,000. carriage and the award for damages is proper.

ISSUE: Whether or not reduction in the amounts of damages RULING: NO. International Air Transportation Association
awarded was proper. (IATA) states that changes to the ticket requested by the
passenger will be subject to carrier’s regulations. Private
respondent wanted a rerouting to Hamburg, Geneva, Rome,
Hong Kong, and Italy, which shortened the itinerary on the Respondent, on the other hand, filed her Answer to the
ticket issued by AF Manila. Considering the original Amended Complaint, increasing the valuation of the subject
restrictions on the ticket, it was not unreasonable for Air property to more than two million pesos.
France to deny the request.
RTC rendered a decision favoring the Dino, ordering, among
With a claim for large amount of damages, the Court finds it others, to pay Jardines actual and/or compensatory damages.
unusual for the respondent, a lawyer, to easily forget the vital
CA reversed the decision of the court below, ruling that the
information to substantiate its plea. It is also essential before
true nature of the contract between the parties is one of
an award for damages that the claimant must satisfactorily
equitable mortgage, as shown by the fact that the amount of
prove during the trial the existence of the factual basis of the
the supposed sale price, P165,000 earns monthly interest.
damages and its causal connection to the defendant’s acts.
Further, it also deleted the damages awarded to Dino.
In the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v CA, the court held
ISSUE: Whether or not CA committed an error in going
that KLM was chargeable with the duty and responsibility of
beyond the issues of the case by deleting the award for
specifically informing the respondents of conditions
damages despite the fact that the same was not raised as an
prescribed in their tickets or in the very least, to ascertain that
issue in the appeal.
the respondents read them before they accepted their passage
tickets. RULING. NO. A close examination of the record of this case
reveals that the finding of fact of the CA are all based on
Unlike in the KLM case, where the breach of contract was
documentary evidence and on admissions and stipulation of
aggravated by the discourteous and arbitrary conduct of an
facts made by the parties.
official, here, Air France employees in Hamburg informed
private respondent that his ticket were partly stamped “non- Sec. 8, Rule 51 of the Rules of Courts provides that no error
endorsable” and “valid on Air France only”. Mere refusal to which does not affect the jurisdiction over the subject matter
accede to the passenger’s wishes does not necessarily or the validity of the judgement appealed from or the
translate to bad faith, to our mind, the respondent has failed proceedings therein will be considered unless stated in the
to show wanton, malevolent, or reckless misconduct assignment of errors, or closely related to or dependent on an
imputable to petitioner in its refusal to reroute. assigned error and properly argued in the brief, save as the
court may pass upon plain errors and clerical errors.
Omissions by ordinary passengers may be condoned but
more is expected of members of the bar cannot feign Clearly, the appellate court may pass upon plain error even if
ignorance of such limitations and restrictions. An award for they are not stated in the assignment of errors.
moral and exemplary damages cannot be sustained under the
circumstances, but petitioner has to refund the unused In People v Sara, the Court held that a witness’ testimony
coupons in the Air France ticket to the private respondent. cannot be considered as competent proof and cannot replace
the probative value of official receipts to justify the award of
actual damages, for jurisprudence instructs that the same
must be duly substantiated by receipts. Hence, there being no
3. DINO V JARDINES
official receipts whatsoever to support petitioners claim for
 A witness’ testimony cannot be considered as actual or compensatory damages, said claim must be denied.
competent proof and cannot replace the probative
value of official receipts to justify the award of actual
damages, for jurisprudence instructs that the same 4. DICHOSO v. CA
must be duly substantiated by receipts.
 Actual or compensatory damages cannot be made to
FACTS: rely on speculation, conjecture, or guesswork, but
must depend upon competent proof.
Petitioner Leonides C. Dino (Dino) filed a petition for
Consolidation of Ownership with the RTC Baguio. She FACTS: Spouses Gaspar Prila and Maria Beldad, owned a
alleged that Lina Jardines (Jardines) executed in her favor a parcel of land in Camarines Sur, surveyed in the name of
Deed of Sale with Pacto de Retro over a parcel of land with Gaspar Prila. Upon the death of Maria Beldad, the eastern half
improvements. The redemption period expired but Jardines thereof was given to Vivencia Prila, one third to Asuncion
was not able to redeem or repurchase the subject property, Pacamara, and the other one third to Custodia Parcia.
thus, as a consequence, absolute ownership over the property
has been consolidated in favor of the petitioner. In 1995, Vivencia Prila sold her 4/6 portion to the petitioner
Ernesto Dichoso, was had been, ever since, in actual physical
Respondent Jardines, on the contrary, argued that the Deed of possession thereof, exercising various acts of ownership
Sale with Pacto de Retro did not embody the real intention of thereon.
the parties, and that the transaction was actually a simple
loan. She further alleged that she never intended to sell her On the other hand, Asuncion Pacamara sold to the wife of
property to the petitioner, which is worth one and a half private respondent Teodolfo Ramos her 1/6 share, but the
million pesos. She has also shown willingness to pay for the deed exceeds the share of Pacamara. Hence, aforesaid excess
said loan, and due to the malicious suit by the petitioner, which Ramos claims to have possessed, is now the land in
respondent suffered moral damages. question.

Thereafter, petitioner filed an Amended Complaint, adding Respondent Teodolfo Ramos took possession of the contested
allegations the she suffered moral damages. She is now Riceland upon its purchase. One third of the harvested palay
claiming an additional P165,000 for moral and exemplary planted in the disputed land went to Ramos and the
damages. remaining two-thirds was the tenant’s share.
On the other hand, petitioner Ernesto Dichoso claims that the Repondent wrote to the petitioner demanding for the cost of
disputed land is inside his property which he acquired from his properties, and P100,000 as damages.
Vivencia Prila, evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale.
Private respondent felt his demand letter left unheeded.
Sometime in 1967, Ramos seized the produce of the land Therefore, the instituted an action for Damages before the
consisting of 50 cavans of palay. In retaliation, Dichoso also Makati RTC.
appropriated six cavans of palay.
Petitioner contended that it has no liability whatsoever
Respondent Ramos filed a complaint for quieting of title over because there was neither a report of mishandled baggage nor
the riceland. CFI rendered a decision in favor of Ramos and a tracer telex received from Vienna station. However, it stated
against Dichoso. CA affirmed the decision of the trial court. that if at all liable its obligation is limited by the Warsaw
Convention rate.
ISSUE: Whether or not the tenant of Ramos be rewarded his
two-thirds share and that he will be deprived of his share if Trial court observed that petitioner’s actuation was not
only one third of the harvest will be awarded to him. attended by bad faith. Nevertheless, it awarded private
respondent damages and attorney’s fees.
RULING. No. Actual or compensatory damages cannot be
presumed, but must be duly proved, and proved with ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner acted in bad faith and is
reasonable degree of certainty. A court cannot rely on liable for moral and exemplary damages.
speculation, conjecture, or guesswork as to the fact and
amount of damages, but must depend upon competent proof RULING: No. In breach of contract of carriage by air, moral
that they have suffered and on evidence of the actual amount damages are awarded only if the defendant acted in bad faith.
thereof. Bad faith means a breach of a known duty through some
motive of interest or will. The trial court erred in awarding
It is undisputed that the land in question yields an average of moral damages to private respondent. The established facts
twenty sacks of palay per planting and that it is planted to evince that petitioner’s late delivery of the baggage for 11
palay twice a year. Ramos’ share of the harvest is only 1/3. In days was not motivated by ill will or bad faith. In fact, it
view of his dispossession from 1964 and the fact that his immediately coordinated with its Central Baggage Services to
tenant has vacated the land that same year, he cannot allege trace private respondent’s suitcase and succeeded in finding
that his tenant is entitled to his two-thirds share. it. It was discovered that the interline tag of private
respondent’s baggage was accidentally taken off. According
The award of actual damages is hereby REDUCED in
to petitioner’s Manager for Administration of Airport
proportion in the harvests, from 1964, up to the time the land
Services, it was customary for destination stations to hold a
appurtenant to the respondent.
tagless baggage until properly identified.

Bad faith must be substantiated by evidence. It cannot be

5. PHILIPPINE AIR LINES v. MIANO presumed; it must be established by clear and convincing
evidence. Again the unbroken jurisprudence is that in breach
 In breach of contract of carriage by air, moral of contract cases where the defendant is not shown to have
damages are awarded only if the defendant acted in acted fraudulently, or in bad faith, liability for damages is
bad faith. Bad faith means a breach of a known duty limited to the natural and probable consequences of the
through some motive of interest or will. breach of the obligation which the parties had foreseen or
 Bad faith must be substantiated by evidence. Bad could reasonably have foreseen. The damages, however, will
faith cannot be presumed; it must be established by not include liability for moral damages.
clear and convincing evidence.
 The prerequisite for the award of exemplary We can neither sustain the award of exemplary damages. The
damages in cases of contract or quasi-contract is that prerequisite for the award of exemplary damages in cases of
defendant acted in wanton, fraudulent, reckless, contract or quasi-contract is that the defendant acted in
oppressive or malevolent manner. wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent
 Attorney’s fees cannot be recovered as part of manner. The undisputed facts do not so warrant the
damages because of the policy that no premium characterization of the action of the petitioner.
should be placed on the right to litigate. Award of
attorney’s fees must be deleted where the award of
moral and exemplary damages are eliminated. 6. DBP v. CA and LYDIA CUBA

FACTS: Private respondent Florante Miano (Miano) took  A court cannot rely on speculations, conjectures, or
petitioner Philippine Airlines’s flight bound for Germany. He guesswork as to the fact and amount of damages, but
had an immediate connecting flight via Lufthansa t Vienna, must depend upon competent proof that they have
Austria. At the NAIA, he checked-in one brown suitcase been suffered by the injured party and on the best
containing money, documents, camera, suits, sweaters, shirts, obtainable evidence of the actual amount thereof.
pants, shoes, and other accessories.
FACTS: Lydia Cuba obtained loans from the Development
Upon his arrival at Vienna, his baggage went missing. After 3 Bank of the Philippines, totaling to P316,000. As security for
hours of waiting, he proceeded to Czechoslovakia. Eleven the said loans, Cuba executed two Deeds of Assignments of
days after, his suitcase was delivered to him. He claimed that the Leasehold Rights of a Fishpond Lease from the
because of the delay in the delivery, he was forced to borrow Government.
money to buy clothes, pay doe the transportation of his
baggage, and lost his camera. Cuba failed to pay her loans on the schedules dates. Thus,
without foreclosure proceedings, defendant DBP
appropriated the Leasehold Rights over the fishpond.
Further, DBP executed Deed of Conditional Sale of the party and on the base obtainable evidence of the actual
Leasehold Right in favor of Cuba over the same fishpond in amount thereof.
question.
In the preset case, the trial court awarded in favor of Cuba
In the negotiation for repurchase, plaintiff Cuba addressed P1,067,500 as actual damages, this award was affirmed by the
two letters to DBP. The bank further accepted the offer to Court of Appeals.
repurchase. Thereafter, a new Fishpond Lease Agreement
We find that the alleged loss of personal belongings was not
was issued by the Ministry of Agriculture in favor of Cuba
proved by clear evidence. Other than the testimony of Cuba
only, in the exclusion of his husband.
and her caretaker, there was no proof as to the existence of
Cuba failed to pay the amortization of as stated in the Deed of those items before DBP took over the fishpond in question. As
Conditional Sale. Thus, DBP filed a notice of rescission and pointed out by DBP, there was no inventory of the alleged loss
took possession of the fishpond. Thereafter, DBP executed a items before the loss which is normal in a project which
Deed of Conditional Sale to defendant Agripina Caperal. sometimes, if not most often, is lest to the care of other
Caperal was then awarded the Fishpond Lease Agreement. persons. Neither was a single receipt or record of acquisition
presented.
The trial court resolved the issue in favor of Cuba by declaring
that DBP’s possession and ownership of the property without Curiously, in her complaint dated 17 May 1985, Cuba
foreclosure was violative of Art. 2088 of the Civil Code which included “losses of property” as among the damages
provides that the creditor cannot appropriate the things given resulting from DBP’s takeover of the fishpond. Yet, it was
by way of pledge or mortgage, or dispose of them. Any only in September 1985 when her son and a caretaker went to
stipulation to the contrary is null and void. the fishpond and the adjoining house that she came to know
of the alleged loss of several articles. Such claim for losses of
The trial court also declared the Assignment of Leasehold
property having been made before the knowledge of the
Rights for being a clear case of pactum commissorium
alleged actual loss, was therefore speculative. The alleged loss
expressly prohibited ad declared null and void by Article 2088
could have been a mere afterthought or subterfuge to justify
of the Civil Code.
her claim for actual damages.
As to damages, the trial court found ample evidence of record
With regard to the award of p517,000 representing the value
that in the representatives of DBP ejected Cuba and her
of the bangus which died when DBP took possession of the
caretakers not only from the fishpond area but also from
fishpond, the same was not called for. Such loss was not duly
adjoining big house; and found the house unoccupied and
proved; besides, the claim therefor was delayed
destroyed and Cuba’s personal belongings, machineries,
unreasonably, form 1978 until after the filing f her complaint
equipment, tools, and other articles which were kept in the
in 1985, Cuba did not bring to the attention of DBP the alleged
house were missing. The missing items were valued at
loss. In fact, in her letter dated October 1979, nowhere in the
P550,000. Further, because of DBP prevented Cuba’s men
same did Cuba intimate that upon DBP’s takeover, there was
from feeding the fish, she lost P517,000.
a total of 230,000 pieces of bangus. The award for actual
The trial court also further found that DBP was guilty of gross damages should, therefore, be struck down for lack of
bad faith in falsely representing to the Bureau of Fisheries that sufficient basis.
it had foreclosed its mortgage in Cuba’s leasehold rights. And
In view, however, of DBP’s act of appropriating Cuba’s
that by reason of her unlawful ejectment, Cuba suffered
leasehold rights which was contrary to law and public policy,
“moral shock, degradation, social humiliation, and serious
as well as its false representation to the then Ministry of
anxieties for which she became sick and had to be
Agriculture and Natural Resources that it had foreclosed the
hospitalized”.
mortgage, an award of moral damages in the amount of
Therefore, a sum of P1,067,500 was awarded to Cuba as actual P50,000 is in order conformably with Article 2219 (10), in
damages, P100,000 as moral damages, P50,000 for exemplary relation to Article 21 of the Civil Code. Exemplary or
damages, and P100,000 as and for attorney’s fees. corrective damages in the amount of P25,000 should likewise
be awarded by way of example or correction for the public
Courts of Appeals rules that Cuba was not entitled to loss of good. There being an award of exemplary damages,
profits for lack of evidence, but agreed with the trial court as attorney’s fees are also recoverable.
to the actual damages. It, however, deleted the amount of
exemplary damages and reduced the award for moral
damages and attorney’s fees.
7. PNOC v CA and MARIA EFIGENIA FISHING
ISSUE: Whether or not the modification of damages CORPORATION
awarded to Cuba is proper.
 There are two kinds of actual or compensatory
RULING: Art. 2199 provides “Except as provided by law or damages. One is the loss of what a person actually
by stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate compensation possesses (dano emergente), and the other is the
only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly failure to receive as a benefit that which would have
proved. Such compensation is referred to as compensatory pertained to him.
damages.  A party is entitled to adequate compensation only for
such pecuniary loss actually suffered and duly
Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but proved.
must be proved with reasonable degree of certainty. A court  To enable an injured party to recover actual or
cannot rely on speculation, conjectures, or guesswork as to the compensatory damages, he is required to prove the
fact and amount of damages, but must depend upon actual amount of loss with reasonable degree of
competent proof that they have been suffered by the injured certainty premised upon competent proof and on the
 best evidence available—damages cannot be ISSUE: Whether or not the evidence presented by the
presumed and courts, in making an award must point private respondent is enough to prove its claim for damages.
out specific facts that could afford a basis for
RULING: YES. Under Art. 2199 of the Civil Code, actual of
measuring whatever compensatory or actual
compensatory damages are those awarded in satisfaction of,
damages are borne.
or in recompose for loss or injury sustained. They proceed
 In the absence of competent proof on the actual
from a sense of natural justice and are designed to repair the
damage suffered, a party is entitled to nominal
wrong that has been done, to compensate for the injury
damages. Nominal damages are damages in name
inflicted and not to impose a penalty. In actions based on torts
only and not in fact. When these are allowed, they are
or quasidelicts, actual damages include all the natural and
not treated as an equivalent of a wrong inflicted but
probable consequences of the act or omission complained of.
simply in recognition of the existence of a technical
There are two kinds of actual or compensatory damages: one
injury.
is the loss of what a person already possesses, and the other is
 A plaintiff’s failure to pay the docket fee
the failure to receive as a benefit that which would have
corresponding to its increased claim for damages
pertained to him.
under the amended complaint should not be
considered as having curtailed the lower court’s To enable to injured party to recover actual or compensatory
jurisdiction—the unpaid docket fee should be damages, he is required to prove the actual amount of loss
considered as a lien on the judgment. with the reasonable degree of certainty premised upon
competent proof and on the best evidence available. The
FACTS: In the early morning of 1977 on the way to Navotas,
burden of proof is on the party who would be defeated if no
MV Maria Efigenia XV, owned by private respondent Maria
evidence would be presented on either side.he must establish
Efigenia Fishing Corporation, collided with vessel
his case by preponderance of evidence which means that the
Petroparcel which at that time was owned by Luzon
evidence , as a whole, adduced by one side is superior to that
Stevedoring Corporation.
of another.
After investigation, Philippine Coast Guard concluded that
In this case, actual damages were proven through the sole
Petroparcel is at fault. After unsuccessful demands on
testimony of private respondent’s general manager and
petitioner, private respondent sued LSC and the Petroparcel
certain pieces of documentary evidence. Except for the value
captain, Edgardo Doruelo, paying thereto a docket fee of
of the 1,050 tubs of fish, the pieces of documentary evidence
P1,252 and the legal research fee of P2.00. Private respondent
proffered by private respondent with respect to items and
prayed for an award of P692,680, allegedly representing the
equipment with corresponding prices approximately 10 years
value of the fishing nets, boat equipment and cargoes of MV
after the collision.
Mania Efigenia XV. During the pendency of the case,
petitioner PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation The exhibits were presented ostensibly in the course of Del
(PNOC) sought to be substituted in place of LSC as it had Rosario’s testimony. Private respondent did not present any
already acquired ownership of the Petroparcel. other witness especially those whose signatures appear in the
price quotations, however, the such quotations are ordinary
Private respondent later sought he amendment of its
private writings which under the Revised Rules of Court
complaint on the ground that the original complaint failed to
should have been proffered along with the testimony of the
plead for the recovery of the lost value of the hull of MV Maria
authors thereof. The price quotations presented as exhibits
Efigenia, alleging that the vessel had an actual value of
partake of the nature f hearsay evidence considering that the
P800,000 and after deducting the insurance payment of
persons who issued them were not presented as witness.
P200,000, the amount of P600,000 should likewise be claimed.
Nonetheless, the non-admissability of said exhibits does not
After trial, the court rendered a decision in favor of private
mean that it totally deprives private respondent any redress
respondent, ordering PNOC to pay, P6-million for the value
for the loss of its vessel. Nominal damages are awarded in
of the fishing boar with interest, and P50,000 as and fro
every obligation arising from law, contracts, quasi-contracts,
attorney’s fees, and the cost of suit.
acts or omissions punished by law, and quasi0delicts, or in
The lower court cited the testimony of the general manager of every case where the property right has been invaded.
private respondent. He testified that at the time the vessel
Under Article 2223 of the Civil Code, “the adjudication of
sank, it was then carrying 1,060 tubs of assorted fish. He
nominal damages shall preclude further contest upon the
further added that with the loss of the flagship vessel, the case
right involved and all accessory questions, as between the
constrained him to hire the services of counsel whom he paid
parties to the suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.
P60,000.
Actually, nominal damages are damages in name only and
As to the award of actual damages, the lower court took into
not in fact. Where these are allowed, they are not treated as an
account pieces of documentary evidence that private
equivalent of a wrong inflicted but simply in recognition of
respondent proffered during trial. On the other hand, the
the existence of a technical injury. However, the amount to be
lower court noted that petitioner only presented a senior
awarded as nominal damages shall be equal or at least
estimator at PNOC Dockyard & Engineering Corporation, as
commensurate to the injury sustained by private respondent
sole witness and it did not bother at all to offer any
considering the concept and purpose of such damages. The
documentary evidence to support its position.
amount of nominal damages to be awarded may also depend
Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but the lower on certain special reasons extant in the case.
court declined the same for lack of merit. Court of Appeals
Applying now such principles to the instant case, we have on
further affirmed the decision in toto.
record the fact that petitioner’s vessel Petroparcel was at fault
as well as private respondent’s complaint. This court believes
that such allegations in the original and amended complaints amount of damages, but mmust depend on the actual proof
can be the basis for determination of fair amount of nominal that damages had been suffered and evidence of the actual
damages inasmuch as a complaint alleges the ultimate facts amount. We are bound by such findings. On the contrary,
constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. these factual findings are supported by substantial evidence
on record.
WHEREFORE, the challenged decision of the Court of
Appeals affirming that of the Regional Trial Court, is hereby Anent the award of moral and exemplary damages assigned
MODIFIED. We believe that an award of P2-Million in favor as errors, the findings of the respondent court are persuasive.
of private respondent as and for nominal damages is in order.
RCPI’s argument that it cannot be held liable for exemplary
damages, being penal or punitive in character, is without
merit. We have so held in many cases, and oddly, quite a
8. RADIO COMMUNICATIONS v CA and SPOUSES
number of them likewise involved the herein petitioner as the
MINERVA TIMAN and FLORES TIMAN
transgressor.
 Petitioner RCPI is liable for moral and exemplary
In contracts and quasi-contracts, exemplary damages may be
damages because of its gross negligence or careless in
awarded if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent,
transmitting a condolence message expressing
reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. There was gross
sadness and sorrow in a “Happy Birthday” card and
negligence on the part of RCPI personnel in transmitting the
placed in a “Christmasgram” envelope.
wrong telegram, of which RCPI must be held liable. Gross
 RCPI gross carelessness or negligence constitute
carelessness or negligence constitutes wanton misconduct.
wanton misconduct, hence, exemplary damages may
be awarded to the aggrieved party.

FACTS: In January 1983, respondent spouses sent a telegram 10. GELUZ v CA and OSCAR LAZO
of condolence to their cousins at Calbayog City, through
 The minimum award for death of a person does not
petitioner Radio Communications of the Philippines Inc.
cover the case of an unborn foetus that is not
(RCPI) at Cubao, Quezon City, to convey their deepest
endowed with personality and incapable of having
sympathy for the recent death of their cousin’s mother-in-law.
rights and obligations.
The condolence telegram was correctly transmitted, however,  Since an action for recovery of pecuniary damages on
the condolence message as communicated and delivered to account of the personal injury or death pertains
the addressee was typewritten on a “Happy Birthday” primarily to the injured, no such right of action could
greeting card and placed inside a “Christmasgram” envelope. derivatively accrue to the parents or heirs of an
Believing that the transmittal was done intentionally and with unborn child.
gross breach of contract resulting to ridicule, contempt, and  The damages which parents of an unborn child can
humiliation of the private respondents and the addressees, recover are limited to the moral damages for the
the spouses filed a complaint for damages. illegal arrest of the normal development of the foetus,
i.e. on the account of distress of their parental
The trial court rendered a judgment in favor of the
expectations, as well as to exemplary damages, if the
respondents Timans which was affirmed by the CA in toto.
circumstances should warrant them (Art. 2230).
ISSUES: Whether or not the court erred in condemning the
FACTS: Nita Villanueva met defendant Antonio Geluz
petitioner to the pay (1) actual and compensatory damages,
(Geluz) in 1948. In 1950, she became pregnant by her present
(2) moral damages, (3) exemplary damages, and (4)
husband before they were legally married. To conceal her
attorney’s fees.
pregnancy form her, she had herself aborted by the Geluz. She
RULING. YES. It is self-evident that a telegram of condolence had herself aborted again in 1953. Finally, Nita again aborted
is intended and meant to convey a message of sorrow and a two-month old foetus. The plaintiff was at this time
sympathy. Precisely, it is denominated “telegram of campaigning for elections and he did not know of, nor gave
condolence” because it tenders sympathy and offers to share consent to the abortion.
another’s grief. It seems out of this world, therefore, to place
The trial court and Court of Appeals predicated the award of
that message of condolence in a birthday card and deliver the
damages in the sum of P3,000 upon the provisions of Article
same in a Christmas envelope for such acts of carelessness and
2206 of the Civil Code.
incompetence not only render violence to good taste and
common sense, they depict a bizarre presentation of the ISSUE: Whether or not the award for damages is proper.
sender’s feelings. They ridicule the deceased’s loved one and
destroy the atmosphere of grief and respect for the departed. RULING: No. Since an action for pecuniary damages on
account of personal injury or death pertains primarily on the
It is not surprising that when the Timans’ telegraphic message account of personal injury to the one injured, it is easy to see
reached their cousin, it became the joke of the Midorandas’ that if no action for such damages could be instituted on
friends, relatives, and associates who thought that the behalf of the unborn child on account of the injuries it
unpardonable mix-up was a mockery of the death of the received, no such right of action did accrue on behalf of the
mother-in-law of the sender’s cousin. Thus, it was not unborn child, the same was extinguished by its pre-natal
unexpected that because of this unusual incident, caused death.
Minerva Timan’s nervousness and hypertension resulting in
his confinement at the Capitol Medical Center. This is not to say that the parents are not to collect any
damages at all. But such damages must be those inflicted
The petitioner argues that a court cannot rely on the directly upon them, as distinguished from the injury or
speculation, conjectures, or guess owek as to the fact and violation of the rights of the deceased, his right to life and
physical integrity. Because the parents cannot expect either The common carrier’s duty to observe the requisite diligence
help, support, or services from an unborn child, they would in the shipment of goods lasts from the time the articles are
be normally be limited to moral damages for the illegal arrest surrendered to or unconditionally placed in the possession of,
for the normal development of the foetus, on account of and received by, the carrier for transportation until delivered
distress and anguish attendant to its loss, and the to, or until the lapse of reasonable time for their acceptance
disappointment of their parental expectations (Art. 2217), as by, the person entitled to receive them. When goods are
well as to exemplary damages, if the circumstances should shipped either are lost or arrive in damaged condition, a
warrant them (Art. 2230). presumption arises against the carrier of its failure to observe
that diligence, and there need not be an express finding of
But in the case before us, both the trial court and CA have not
negligence to hold it liable.
found any basis for an award of moral damages, evidently
because the appellee’s indifference to the previous abortions (2) No. When the obligation, regardless of its source is
of his wife, also caused by the appellant herein, clearly breached the contravenor can be held liable for damages.
indicates that he was unconcerned with the frustration of his With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept
parental hopes and affections. of actual and compensatory damages, the rate of interest, as
well as the accrual thereof, is imposed, at the discretion of the
court at the rate of 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall
10. EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC. v CA and be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages except when
MERCANTILE INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. or until the demand cam be established with reasonable
certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is established with
 When an obligation is breached, the contravenor can reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin to run from the
be held liable for damages. time the claim is made judicially or extrajudically, but when
 In case of other obligations, the interest on the such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the time
amount of damages may be imposed at the discretion the demand is made, the interest shall begin to run only from
of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. the date the judgment of the court in made at which time the
quantification of damages may be deemed to have been
FACTS: In 1981, two fiber drums of riboflavin were shipped
reasonably ascertained. The actual base of the computation of
from Japan for delivery vessel owned by defendant Eastern
legal interest shall, in any case, be on the amount finally
Shipping Lines. The shipment was insured under private
adjudged.
respondent. The latter expected to one drum, said to be in bad
order, which damage was unknown to the petitioner.

Allied Brokerage Corporation received the shipment from 11. NACAR v. GALLERY FRAMES
Metro Port Service. One drum opened and without seal.
Allied Brokerage made deliveries of the shipment to the  When the obligation is breached, not constituting a
consignee’s warehouse. The latter excepted to one drum loan or forbearance of money, an interest on the
which contained spillages, while the rest of the contents was amount of damages awarded may be imposed at the
fake. discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum.

Plaintiff contended that due to the losses sustained by said FACTS: Petitioner Dario Nacar filed a complaint for
drum, the consignee suffered losses due to the fault and constructive dismissal before the MLRC against respondents
negligence of defendants. Claims were presented against Gallery Frames and/or Felipe Bordey Jr. The Labor Arbiter
defendants who failed and refused to pay the same. found that he was dismissed without a valid or just cause.
Thus, petitioner was awarded backwages and separation pay.
Defendant argued that the shipment was discharged in good
order from the vessel in the custody of Metroport Service so Respondent appealed to the NLRC but the same was
that any losses incurred after the shipment was incurred after dismissed for lack of merit. CA dismissed its Petition for
the shipment was turned over to the latter. Review on Certiorari as well as its Motion for
Reconsideration. Later, respondents sought relief before the
Metroport averred that although subject shipment was Supreme Court. SC denied the petition.
discharged unto its custody, portion of the same was already
in bad order condition when received by it but nonetheless, it When the entry of judgment became final and executory, the
still exercised extraordinary care and diligence in the delivery case was referred back to the Labor Arbiter. Petitioner filed a
of the cardo to consignee in the same condition shipment was Motion for Correct Computation, praying that his backwages
received by it. be computed from the date of his dismissal up to the finality
of the resolution.
ISSUES: (1) Whether or not a claim for damage sustained on
a shipment of goods can be a solidary. A Writ of Exectution was issued by the labor Arbiter ordering
the sheriff to collect from respondents the total amount of
(2) Whether or not the payment of legal interest on an award P471,320. Respondents filed a Motion to Quash Writ of
for loss or damage is to be computed from the time the Exectution, arguing that the decision became final and
complaint is filed or from the date the decision appealed executory, and the same cannot be altered or amended
from is rendered
anymore. Labor Arbiter denied the motion, thus, an Alias
RULING: (1) Yes. Since it is the duty of the arrastre to take Writ of Execution was issued.
good care of the goods that are in its custody and to delivery
Petitioner then filed a Manifestation and Motion praying for
the same in good condition to the consignee, such
the recomputation of the monetary award to include the
responsibility also devolves upon the carrier. Both aarastre
appropriate interests. Labor Arbiter granted the motion but
and carrier are therefore charged with the obligation to
only up to the amount of P11,459. It reasoned that it is the
deliver the goods in good condition to the consignee.
October 1998 decision that became final and executory. bound himself to be personally liable or that he exceeded the
However, the Labor Arbiter reasoned that since the decision limits of his authority. Ca found the award of atttorney’s fees
states that the separation pay and backwages are computed excessive.
only up to the promulgation of the said decision, it is the
ISSUE: Whether or not the imposition of Attorney’s fees
amount of P158,919 that should be executed.
proper.
Petitioner appealed before the NLRC, which appeal was
RULING. No. Interest may be imposed even in the absence of
denied. CA also denied his petition.
the stipulation in the contract. We sustain the ruling of both
ISSUE: Whether or not the computation of legal interest in RTC and CA that it is proper to impose interest
an obligation not constituting loan or forbearance of money notwithstanding the absence of stipulation in the contract.
be on the amount finally adjudged. Article 2210 of the Civil Code expressly provides that interest
may, in the discretion of the court, be allowed upon damages
RULING: Yes. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or
awarded for breach of contract. In this case, there is no
forbearance of money, is breached, an interest on the amount
question that petitioner is legally obligated to return the P3.5-
of damages awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the
million because of her failure to fulfill the obligation under the
court at the rate of 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall
conditional Deed of Sale, despite demand. She has in fact
be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages, except when
admitted that the conditions were not fulfilled and that she
or until the demand can be established with reasonable
was willing to return the full amount of P3.5-million but has
certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is established with
not actually done so. Petitioner enjoyed the use of the money
reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin to run from the
from the time it was given to her until now. Thus she is
time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially, but when
already in default of her obligation from the date of demand,
such certainty cannot be so established at the demand is
i.e., on September 27, 2000.
made, the interest shall begin to run only from the date the
judgment of the court is made. The actual base for the Further, forbearance of money, goods or credits should
computation of legal interest shall, in any case, be on the therefore refer to arrangements other than loan agreements,
amount finally adjudged. where a person acquiesces to the temporary use of his money,
goods, or credits pending happening of certain conditions. In
this case, the respondent-spouses parted with their money
12. ESTORES v. SUPANGAN even before the conditions were fulfilled. They have therefore
allowed or granted forbearance to the seller to use their
 the general rule is that the applicable rate of interest money pending fulfillment of the conditions and when those
“shall be computed in accordance with the conditions were breached, they are entitled not only to the
stipulation of the parties. Absent any stipulation, the return of the principal amount paid, but also to compensation
applicable rate of interest shall be 12% per annum for the use of their money, absent any stipulation, should be
when the obligation arises out of a loan or a the same rate of legal interest applicable to a loan since the use
forbearance of money, goods, or credits. In other or deprivation of funds is similar to a loan.
cases, it shall be six percent.
Petitioner’s unwarranted withholding of the money which
FACTS: Petitioner Hormojina Estores (Estores) and rightfully pertains to respondents-spouses amount to
respondent-spouses Arturo and Laura Supangan entered into forbearance of money which can be considered as an
a Conditional Deed of Sale of a land in Cavite. After seven involuntary loan. Thus the applicable rate of interest is 12%
years for the time of the execution of the contract, petitioner per annum. In Eastern Shipping Lines, the Court suggested
failed to comply with her obligation. Hence, respondent that in the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be
demanded the return of the amount of P3.5-million. Petitioner 12% per annul to be computed from default, ie, from judicial
promised the return of the money within 120 days. or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions
Respondents agreed provided that an interest of 12% of Article 1169 of the Civil Code.
compounded annually shall be imposed on the 3.5-million.
Under Article 2208 of the Civil Code, attorney’s fees may be
Petitioner still failed to comply with her obligation, hence, recovered when the defendant’s act or omission has
respondent-spouses filed a complaint with the RTC Malabon compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to
to petitioner as well as their agent. Respondent averred that incur expenses to protect his interest, and in any other case
they are willing to return the money but without any interest where the expenses of litigation should be recovered. In all
as the same was not agreed upon. They argued that since the cases, the attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation must be
Conditional Sale provided only for the return of the reasonable.
downpayent in case of breach, they cannot be held liable to
pay legal interest as well. Considering the circumstances of the instant case, we find
respondent-spouses entitled to recover attorney’s fees. There
RTC found the respondent-spouses entitled to interest by is no doubt that they were forced to litigate to protect their
only at the rate of 6% per annum and not 12%. When the case interest, ie, to recover their money. However, we find the
reached the CA, the only issue submitted for its resolution is amount of P50,000 more appropriate in line with the policy
whether it is proper to impose interest for an obligation that enunciated in Article 2208 of the Civil Code that the award of
does not involve a loan or forbearance of money in the attorney’s fees must always be reasonable.
absence of stipulation of the parties. CA affirmed the ruling
of the RTC. Forbearance of money- the obligation of the creditor to desist
for a fixed period form requiring the debtor to repay the debt
Moreover, CA held that respondent’s agent Arias could not then due and for which 12% per annum is imposed as interest
be held solidarily liable with petitioner because he merely rate.
acted as agent of the latter. There was no showing the he
 13. FRANCISCO v CO The Court is not wont to uphold awards of moral damages
based on haphazard conjectures on the awardee’s resultant
 The court is not want to uphold awards of moral
mental state. We cannot agree with the appellate court that
damages based on haphazard conjectures on the
bad faith on the part of petitioner had been preponderantly
awardee’s resultant mental state. In ascertaining the
established in this case. Bad faith does not simply connote bad
intention of the persons accused of acting in bad faith,
judgment or negligence, but it imports a dishonest purpose
the courts must carefully examine the evidence as to
or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong. It
the conduct and outward acts from which the inward
should be established by clear and convincing evidence since
motive may be determined.
the law always presumes good faith. In ascertaining the
 The general rule is that attorney’s fees cannot be intention of the person accused of acting in bad faith, the
recovered as part of damages because of the public courts must carefully examine the evidence as to the conduct
policy that no premium should be placed on the right and outward acts from which the inward motive that the CA
to litigate. The award of attorney’s fees must be has conducted the mandated careful examination of evidence
deleted where the award of moral and exemplary that would sustain the award of moral damages. Nothing in
damages are deleted. the record establishes any right to moral damages by
FACTS: The parties entered into a Compromise Agreement respondents.
acknowledging the heirs of Baetiong as the owner of the Neither should exemplary damages avail under the
subject properties. Further, it was agreed that the heirs would circumstances. The plaintiff must show that he is entitled to
lease to respondents a portion of the properties, totaling moral, temperate, or compensatory damages before the court
30,000, covering land then already occupied by respondents. may consider the question of whether exemplary damages
The lease subsists for 15 years. should be awarded. If the court has no proof or evidence upon
Five years after the execution of the Compromise Agreement which the claim for moral damages could be based, such
and Contract of Lease, the heir of Baetiong filed a Motion with indemnity could not be outrightly awarded. The same holds
the Quezon City RTC wherein they alleged that respondents true with respect to the award of exemplary damages where
were actually occupying a larger portion of their land than the it must be shown that the party acted with wanton,
30,000 square meter limit agreed upon in the Compromise oppressive, or malevolent manner. Furthermore, this specie
Agreement. They prayed that a commission be constituted for of damages is allowed only in addition to moral damages
the proper enforcement of the Compromise Agreement. such that no exemplary damages can be awarded unless the
claimant first establishes his clear right to moral damages.
RTC granted the motion. CA reversed the decision of the RTC
and rendered the compromise finally terminated and What Article 2208(2) of the Civil Code provides, in order that
executed. It ruled that the heirs of Baetiong were precluded attorney’s fees may be awarded, is that the defendant’s act or
by laches and negligence from asserting such claim, as they omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third
had remained silent for almost five years in contesting the persons or to incur expenses to protect his interest. Tit is
subject areas. settled that the fact that the party was compelled to litigate
and incur expenses to protect and enforce their claim does not
Four years later, petitioner filed a complaint for forcible entry justify the award of attorney’s fees. The general rule is that
against respondents before the MeTC of QC. Petitioner attorney’s fee cannot be recovered as part of damages because
alleged therein that she was the owner in fee simple of a parcel of the public policy that no premium should be placed on the
of land, which she inherited by from her mother. Petitioner right to litigate. The award of attorney’s fees must be deleted
maintained that respondents started fencing the said where the award of moral and exemplary damages are
property. Respondents alleged that the property over which eliminated.
petitioner was asserting her rights was covered under the
Contract of Lease which had been executed pursuant to the
earlier Compromise Agreement. 14. MARIKINA AUTOLINE v. PEOPLE
MeTC ruled in favor of the petitioner, concluding that the  Emergency rule- one who suddenly finds himself in
Contract of Least expressly delianted the coverage of the lease a place of danger, and is required to act without time
agreement. RTC affirmed the decision.
to consider the best means that may be adopted to
CA reversed the ruling of the lower courts, finding that the avoid the impending danger, is not guilty of
complaint was barred by res judicata. It also concluded that negligence if he fails to adopt what subsequently and
due to malicious prosecution, respondents were liable for upon reflection may appear to have been a better
moral damages of P30,000, exemplary damages of P20,000 method unless the emergency in which he finds
and attorney’s fees of P20,000. himself is brought about by his own negligence.
 Actual damages include all the natural and probable
ISSUE: Whether or not damages awarded to petitioner is consequences of the act or omission complained of,
proper. classified as one for the loss of what a person already
RULING: No. In ruling that petitioner was in bad faith in possesses (Dano Emergente), and the other, for the
filinf the instant suit, the appellate court predicated this failure to receive, as a benefit, that which would have
conclusion on the observation that respondent was well- pertained to him (Lucro Cesante).
aware that the issue involved in this case has already been  the burden of proof is on the party who would be
settled by the courts. Due to this, petitioners understandably defeated if no evidence would be presented on either
suffered mental anguish and serious anxiety, thereby entitling side. Actual damages cannot be anchored on mere
them to moral damages. surmises, speculations or conjectures.
FACTS: In the afternoon of 1992, a passenger bus driven by 15. MAGBANUA v JUNSAY
Freddie L. Suelto of Marikina Auto Line Transport
 The term malicious prosecution has been defined as
Corporation struck the terrace of the commercial apartment
an action for damages brought by one against whom
owned by Erlinda V. Valledon. The Senior Building
a criminal prosecution, civil suit, or other legal
Inspection of City Engineer’s Office recommended the
proceeding has been instituted maliciously and
demolition of the terrace to keep its monolithicness, and to
without probable cause, after the termination of such
insure the safety and stability of the building.
prosecution, suit, or other proceeding in favor of the
Valdellon send a letter to the bus company and the driver, defendant therein.
demanding payment within 10 days of receipt P148,440 to  The gravamen of malicious prosecution is not the
cover the cost of the damage to the terrace. The bus company filing of a complaint based on the wrong provision of
and the driver offered P30,000 as settlement which Valledon law, but the deliberate initiation of an action with the
refused. knowledge that the charges were false and
groundless.
Valledon filed a criminal complaint for reckless imprudence
 Elements of malicious prosecution: (1) the
resulting to damage to property against Suelto. She also filed
prosecution did occur, and the defendant as himself
a separate civil complaint against Suelto and the bus company
the prosecutor or that he instigated its
for damages. Trial court found Selto guily of reckless
commencement, (2) the criminal action finally ended
imprudence resulting to damage to property, and ordered the
with an acquittal, (3) in bringing the action, the
bus company to pay, jointly and severally, P150,000 to
prosecutor acted without probable cause; and (4) the
Valledon by way of actual and compensatory damages.
prosecution was impelled by legal malice—an
CA affirmed the decision of the trial court, but the award for improper or a sinister motive.
actual damages was reduced to P100,000.  Probable cause- such facts and circumstances as
would excite the belief, in a reasonable mind, acting
ISSUE: Whether or not the award of P100,000 as actual on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor,
damage is proper. that the person charged was guilty of the crime for
RULING. No. Under Article 2199 of the New Civil Code, which he was prosecuted.
actual damages include all the natural and probable  In an action to recover damages based on malicious
consequence of the act or omission complained of, classified prosecution, it must be established that the
as one for the loss of what a person already possesses (dano prosecution was impelled by legal malice.
emergente) and the other, for the other, for the failure to  There can be no evil motive that should be attributed
receive, as a benefit, that which would have pertained to him to one, who, as a victim of a crime institutes the
(lucro cesante). necessary legal proceedings.

The burden of proof is on the party who would be defeated if

no evidence would be presented mon either side. The burden
is to establish one’s case by a preponderance of evidence
which means that the evidence, as a whole, adduced by one
side, is superior to that of the other. Actual damages are not
presumed. The claimant must prove the actual amount of loss
with a reasonable degree of certainty premised upon
competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable. Specific
facts that could afford a basis for measuring whatever
compensatory or actual damages are borne must be pointed
out. Actual damages cannot be anchored on mere surmises,
speculations or conjectures.

The Court further declared that “where goods are destroyed

by the wrongful act of defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to
their value at the time of the destruction, that is, normally, the
sum of money which he would have to pay in the market for
identical or essentially similar goods, plus in a proper case,
damages for the loss of the use during the period before
replacement.

In the present case, the only damage caused by petitioner

Suelto’s act was to the terrace of private respondent’s
apartment, costing P55,000.0. consequently, petitioner’s
contention that the CA erred in awarding P100,000 by way of
actual damages to private respondent is correct. We agree that
private respondent is entitled to exemplary damages, and
find that the award given by the trial court is reasonable.
Considering the attendant circumstances, we rule that private
respondent Valledon is entitled only P20,000 by way of
exemplary damages.