Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Gutierrez vs. Gutierrez 56 Phil. 177

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    The collision between a passenger truck driven by a chauffeur and owned by Saturnino Cortez, and an automobile driven by 18-year-old Bonifacio Gutierrez and owned by his parents, resulted in injuries to Bonifacio's brother Narciso. While Bonifacio contributed to the accident due to negligent driving, his father Manuel is held liable as the owner of the vehicle under Article 1903 of the Civil Code. Saturnino Cortez and the truck's chauffeur Abelardo Velasco are also liable due to findings that the truck was negligently positioned and operated on the bridge.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gutierrez vs. Gutierrez 56 Phil. 177

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    1K views1 page
    The collision between a passenger truck driven by a chauffeur and owned by Saturnino Cortez, and an automobile driven by 18-year-old Bonifacio Gutierrez and owned by his parents, resulted in injuries to Bonifacio's brother Narciso. While Bonifacio contributed to the accident due to negligent driving, his father Manuel is held liable as the owner of the vehicle under Article 1903 of the Civil Code. Saturnino Cortez and the truck's chauffeur Abelardo Velasco are also liable due to findings that the truck was negligently positioned and operated on the bridge.

    Original Description:

    ObliConDigest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The collision between a passenger truck driven by a chauffeur and owned by Saturnino Cortez, and an automobile driven by 18-year-old Bonifacio Gutierrez and owned by his parents, resulted in injuries to Bonifacio's brother Narciso. While Bonifacio contributed to the accident due to negligent driving, his father Manuel is held liable as the owner of the vehicle under Article 1903 of the Civil Code. Saturnino Cortez and the truck's chauffeur Abelardo Velasco are also liable due to findings that the truck was negligently positioned and operated on the bridge.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views1 page

    Gutierrez vs. Gutierrez 56 Phil. 177

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    The collision between a passenger truck driven by a chauffeur and owned by Saturnino Cortez, and an automobile driven by 18-year-old Bonifacio Gutierrez and owned by his parents, resulted in injuries to Bonifacio's brother Narciso. While Bonifacio contributed to the accident due to negligent driving, his father Manuel is held liable as the owner of the vehicle under Article 1903 of the Civil Code. Saturnino Cortez and the truck's chauffeur Abelardo Velasco are also liable due to findings that the truck was negligently positioned and operated on the bridge.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    ObliConDigest - Gutierrez Vs. Gutierrez 56 Phil.

    177

    Facts:
    On February 2, 1930, a passenger truck and an automobile of private ownership collided while
    attempting to pass each other on a bridge. The truck was driven by the chauffeur Abelardo Velasco, and
    was owned by Saturnine Cortez. The automobile was being operated by Bonifacio Gutierrez, a lad 18
    years of age, and was owned by Bonifacio’s father and mother, Mr. and Mrs. Manuel Gutierrez. At the
    time of the collision, the father was not in the car, but the mother, together with several other members
    of the Gutierrez family were accommodated therein. The collision between the bus and the automobile
    resulted in Narciso Gutierrez suffering a fractured right leg which required medical attendance for a
    considerable period of time.

    Issue:
    1. Whether or not Bonifacio Gutierrez, a minor, is held liable for damages and indemnification.
    2. Whether or not the owner and the driver of the truck are also liable for damages and
    indemnification.

    Ruling:
    1. No. In the United States, it is uniformly held that the head of a house, the owner of an automobile,
    who maintains it for the general use of his family is liable for its negligent operation by one of his
    children, whom he designates or permits to run it, where the car is occupied and being used at the
    time of the injury for the pleasure of other members of the owner's family than the child driving it.

    Pursuant to Article 1903 of the Civil Code, the father alone and not the minor or the mother would
    be liable for the damages caused by the minor. In this case, the youth Bonifacio was an
    incompetent chauffeur, that he was driving at an excessive rate of speed, and that, on approaching
    the bridge and the truck, he lost his head and so contributed by his negligence to the accident.
    However, the guaranty given by the father at the time the son was granted a license to operate
    motor vehicles made the father responsible for the acts of his son. And the source of obligation of
    Manuel Gutierrez is culpa aquiliana.

    2. Yes. The source of obligation of Saturnino Cortez, the owner of the truck, and his chauffeur,
    Abelardo Velasco is culpa contractual. The reason for this conclusion reaches to the findings of the
    trial court concerning the position of the truck on the bridge, the speed in operating the machine,
    and the lack of care employed by the chauffeur.

    You might also like