Scribd
Upload
54 views2 pages

Parties: Petitioner Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc Respondents Intermediate Appellate Court and Casiano Pascua, Material Facts

This case involves a petition filed by Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc. regarding an accident where a jeepney was rear-ended by a truck, killing three passengers and injuring two others. The trial court found the truck driver and owners liable but absolved the jeepney driver and owners. The appellate court affirmed. Petitioners argue all defendants should be liable. The issues are the liabilities of the jeepney and truck drivers and owners under the Civil Code.

Uploaded by

aishikonashiya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
54 views2 pages

Parties: Petitioner Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc Respondents Intermediate Appellate Court and Casiano Pascua, Material Facts

This case involves a petition filed by Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc. regarding an accident where a jeepney was rear-ended by a truck, killing three passengers and injuring two others. The trial court found the truck driver and owners liable but absolved the jeepney driver and owners. The appellate court affirmed. Petitioners argue all defendants should be liable. The issues are the liabilities of the jeepney and truck drivers and owners under the Civil Code.

Uploaded by

aishikonashiya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Parties: Petitioner

Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc

Respondents

Intermediate Appellate Court and Casiano Pascua,

Material Facts:
In this case, an improperly parked passenger jeepney was bumped from behind by a speeding truck
with such violence that three of its passengers died whereas two other passengers suffered injuries.
The representatives of the dead and of the injured passengers filed suits to recover damages
against the driver and the owners of the truck and also against the driver and the owners of the
jeepney. The trial court rendered judgment absolving the driver and the owners of the jeepney but
required the driver and the owners of the truck to compensate the victims. The Plaintiffs appealed
insisting that the driver and the owners of the jeepney should also be made liable. The appellate
court, relying on the doctrine of last clear chance, affirmed the trial court's decision. The plaintiffs
then filed a petition for review on certiorari before this Court. We modified the questioned decision by
making all the defendants solidarity liable.

Relief sought:

Issues: WON

Doctrines:

Laws:

2 Articles 1733, 1755 and 1756 of the New Civil Code, respectively provides:

ART. 1733. Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of
public policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them, according to all the
circumstances of each case.

Such extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods is further expressed in
articles 1734, 1735, and 1746. Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the extraordinary diligence for
the safety of the passengers is further set forth in articles 1755 and 1756.

ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as
human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious
persons, with a due regard for all the circumstances.

ART. 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are


presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that
they observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.

3 Article 1174 of the New Civil Code provides:

ART. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise
declared by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption
of risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which could not be foreseen,
or which, though foreseen, were inevitable.

4 Article 1759 of the New Civil Code provides:

ART. 1759. Common carriers are liable for the death of or injuries to passengers
through the negligence or wilful acts of the former's employees, although such
employees may have acted beyond the scope of their authority or in violation of the
orders of the common carriers.

This liability of the common carriers does not cease upon proof that they exercised
all the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of their
employees.

5 Article 1217 of the New Civil Code provides:

ART. 1217. Payment made by one of the solidary debtors extinguishes the
obligation. If two or more solidary debtors offer to pay, the creditor may choose which
offer to accept.

He who made the payment may claim from his codebtors only the share which
corresponds to each, with the interest for the payment already made. If the payment
is made before the debt is due, no interest for the intervening period may de
demanded.

When one of the solidary debtors cannot, because of his insolvency, reimburse his
share to the debtor paying the obligation, such share shall be borne by all his co-
debtors, in proportion to the debt of each.

6 Article 2181 of the New Civil Code provides:

ART. 2181. Whoever pays for the damage caused by his dependents or employees
may recover from the latter what he has paid or delivered in satisfaction of the claim.

You might also like