TORTS and DAMAGES Course Outline
TORTS and DAMAGES Course Outline
TORTS and DAMAGES Course Outline
Course Outline
References:
TORTS AND DAMAGES by Timoteo B. Aquino, 2015
I. Introduction
III. NEGLIGENCE
A. DEFINITION AND TEST OF NEGLIGENCE
Cases:
1. PLDT vs. CA, GR No. 57079, September 29, 1989
2. Ilocos Norte Electric Company vs. CA, GR No. 53401, November 6,
1989
3. Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil. 809
4. People vs. Delos Santos, 355 SCRA 415 (2001)
5. Evelyn Acuna vs. Rodolfo A. Alventara, Sheriff IV, RTC, Br.50,
Villasis, Pangasinan (A.M. No. 01-1463, March 20, 2001)
6. Belgian Overseas Chartering and Shipping M.V., et.al. vs. Phil.
Insurance Co., In., GR No. 14133, June 5, 2002
1
C. PROBABILITY
Cases:
1. Far Eastern Shipping Company vs. Court of Appeals, 297 SCRA 30
(1998)
Cases:
1. Taylor vs. Manila Electric Railroad and Light Co., 16 Phil. 8 (1910)
2. United States vs. Bonifacio, 34 Phil. 65 (1916)
3. Valenzuela vs. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA 303 (1996)
4. Julian del Rosario vs. Manila Electric Co., 57 Phil. 478 (1932)
G. PROOF OF NEGLIGENCE
a. Burden of proof
b. Presumptions:
Article 2184, NCC
Article 2185, NCC
Article 2188, NCC
2
c. Res Ipsa Loquitor
Applicability of the Rule
Cases:
1. Ma-ao Central Co., Inc. vs. C.A.
2. Africa vs. Caltex (Phil.), Inc., G.R. No. L-12986, March 31, 1966
3. F.F. Cruz and Co., Inc. vs. The Court of Appeals, et. Al., G.R.
No. L-52732, August 29, 1988
4. Republic of the Philippines vs. Luzon Stevedoring Corp., G.R.
No. L-21749, September 29, 1967
5. Far Eastern Shipping Company vs. Court of Appeals, 297 SCRA
59
6. Batiquin vs. Court of Appeals, 258 SCR 334 (1996)
Cases:
1. PLDT vs. SPOUSES ESTEBAN
2. KIM vs. PHILIPPINE AERIAL TAXI, CO., 58 Phil. 838 (1933)
B. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
Cases:
1. M.H. RAKES vs. THE ATLANTIC GULF AND PACIFIC COMPANY, G.R.
No. L-1719, January 23, 1907
2. PHOENIX CONSTRUCTION, INC. and ARMANDO U. CARBONEL vs.
THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and LEONARDO
DIONISIO, G.R. No. L-65295, March 10, 1987
C. FORTUITOUS EVENT
Cases:
1. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, et al. vs. THE COURT OF
APPEALS, GAUDENCIO C. RAYO, et al., 222 SCRA 415, G.R. Nos.
103442-45, May 21, 1993
2. SOUTHEASTERN COLLEGE, INC. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, et al.,
G.R. No. 126389, July 10, 1998
3.
3
D. ASSUMPTION OF RISK
Requisites
Kinds:
a. Express Waiver of the Right to Recover
b. Implied Conditions
Cases:
1. TRANSPORTO vs. MIJARES (1961)
E. PRESCRIPTION
Computation of Period
Article 1146, NCC
V. CAUSATION
A. PROXIMATE CAUSE
a. Definition
Cases:
1. Far Eastern Shipping Company vs. Court of Appeals, 297 SCRA
83, 1998)
2. Singapore Airlines Limited vs. Court of Appeals, et al., 243 SCRA
619(1991)
3. Syjuco vs. Manila Railroad Company, CA- G.R. No. 22631-R,
December 17, 1959
4. Prospero Sabido vs. Carlos Custodio, 124 Phil. 516, 1966
5. Fransisco Vinluan vs. The Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. L-21477-
81, April 29, 1966
4
5. Filomeno Urbano vs. Hon. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R.
No. 72964, January 7, 1988
B. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
Definition
Plaintiff’s Negligence is the Cause
Compound Cases
Part of the Same Causal Set
Defendant’s Negligence is the Only Cause
Cases:
1. PLDT vs. CA
2. Glan People’s Lumber and Hardware, et al. vs. Intermediate
Appellate Court, et al., G.R. No. 70493, May 18, 1989
3. Phoenix Construction, Inc. Vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R.
No. 65295, March 10, 1987
4. Pantranco North Express, Inc. vs. Maricar Bascos Baesa, et al., G.R.
Nos. 79050-51, November 14, 1989
5. LBC Air Cargo vs. Court of Appeals, 241 SCRA 619 (1995)
Cases:
1. Grand Union Supermarket vs. Jose J. Espino, Jr., G.R> No. L-
48250, December 28, 1979
2. Enrique J.L. Ruiz, et.al. vs. The Secretary of National Defense, G.R.
No. L-15526, December 28, 1963
3. Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation vs. Court of Appeals,
176 SCRA 778 (1989)
Abuse of Rights
Elements
Cases:
1. University of the East vs. Romeo A. Jader, G.R. No. 132344,
February 17, 2000
2. Arturo P. Valenzuela, et.al. vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals,
et.al., G.R. No. 83122, October 19, 1990
5
Cases:
1. De Jesus vs. Syquia, 58 Phil. 866
2. Wassmer vs. Velez, 12 SCRA 648 (1964)
3. Gashem Shookat Baksh vs. Court of Appeals, et.al., February 19,
1993
4. Apolonio Tanjanco vs. Hon. Court of Appeals and Araceli Santos,
G.R. No. L-18630, December 17, 1966
Desertion by a Spouse
Cases:
1. Pastor B. Tenchaves vs. Vicenta F. Escano, et al., G.R. No. L-19671,
July 26, 1966
Malicious Prosecution
Definition
Elements
Cases:
1. Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. vs. The Hon. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 81262, August 25, 1989
2. Drilon vs. Court of Appeals, 270 SCRA 211 (1997)
3. Manila Gas Corp vs CA (1980)
6
Public Humiliation
Cases:
1. Rafael vs. The Honorable Oscar Leviste, G.R. No. 51832, April 26,
1989
2. Grand Union Supermarket, Inc. vs. Jose J. Espino, Jr., G.R. No. L-
48250, December 28, 1979
E. HUMAN DIGNITY
Article 26
Privacy
Constitutional Right to Privacy
a. Scope of Protection: Bill of Rights Sec. 1, 2, 3(1), 6, 8 & 17
Interference with Family and Other Relations
Cases:
1. Tenchavez vs. Escano, G.R. No. L-19671, November 29,
1965
Vexation and Humiliation
7
Fraud
Cases:
1. Elenita Ledesma Silva, et al. vs. Esther Peralta, G.R. No. L-
13114, November 25, 1960
Physical Injuries
H. THE DEFENDANTS
Article 2176, NCC
Joint Tort-feasors
Article 2194,NCC
Motor Vehicle Mishaps
Article 2184, NCC
Vicarious Liability (Imputed Negligence)
Statutory Provision:
Article 2180, 2181 and 2182, NCC
Articles 101, 102 and 103 of the Revised Penal Code
Article 58 of the Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD No. 603)
8
Defense of Exercise of Due Diligence
Cases:
1. Cuadra, et al. vs. Alfonso Monfort, 35 Phil. 160 (1970)
2. Macario Tamargo, et al. vs. The Hon. Court of Appeals, et
al., 209 SCRA 518 (1992)
3. Cresencio Libi, et al. vs. Hon. Intermediate Appellate Court,
et al., 214 SCRA 16 (1962)
Cases:
1. Jose S. Amadora, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.,
G.R. No. L-47745, April 15, 1988
2. Phil. School of business Administration vs. Court of
Appeals, 205 SCRA 729 (1992)
Employers
Article 2180, NCC
Article 103, RPC
Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers
Article 102, RPC
I. STRICT LIABILITY
Article 2183 and 2193 of the New Civil Code
1. ANIMALS
Case: Purita Miranda Vestil and Agustin Vestil vs.
Intermediate Appellate Court, et al., G.R. No. 74431,
November 6, 1989
2. FALLING OBJECTS
Article 2193
3. LIABILITY OF EMPLOYERS
Article 1711 and 1712 of the Civil Code
9
4. NUISANCE
a. Definition
b. Kinds
c. Strict Liability and Persons Liable
d. Abatement
Cases: Velasco vs. Manila Electric Company, 40 SCRA 342
(1971)
J. DAMAGES
1. Definition
2. Damnum Absque Injuria
Case: Spouses Cristino and Brigida ustodio, et al. vs Court of
Appeals, et al., 253 SCRA 483
3. Kinds of Damages
Article 2197
a. Actual or Compensatory, Articles 2199, 2200, 2201, 2202, 2205,
2206
Case: Manzanares vs. Moreta, 38 Phil. 823
b. Moral Damages
c. Nominal and Temperate Damages
Articles 2221, 2222, 2223, 2224 and 2225
Cases:
1. Rogelio Ramos vs. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 124354,
December 29, 1999
2. Araneta vs. Bank of America, 40 SCRA 114 (1971)
d. Liquidated Damages
Articles 2226, 2227 and 2228
e. Exemplary or Corrective Damages
Articles 2230, 2231, 2232, 22333, 2234 and 2235
10