California Clothing v. Quinones

CALIFORNIA CLOTHING V.
QUIONES Quinones and agreeing to meet at the Cebu

 Shirley Quinones, a ticketing agent of Cebu Pacific Office. However, they claim that
pacific Air went inside the Guess USA they were gentle and polite when they talked
Botique at the Robinson’s Department Store to Quinones and it was the latter what was
and purchased a pair of black jeans for the arrogant towards them. Hence, they filed a
amount of P2,098 counterclaim, praying for the same reliefs
 She allegedly paid for it then left the store  The RTC dismissed both claims
 However, while she was walking to Mercury o There was good faith on the part of
Drug, a Guess employee approached her and the Guess employees in believing
informed her that she failed to pay for the that Quinones had not paid and they
item she got had the right to ask her about it
 She showed the employee her receipt and o With regards to the letters, the RTC
suggested that they talk about it at the Cebu ruled that the Guess employees were
Pacific Office which was located at the same merely asking for assistance and not
mall to embarrass or humiliate Quinones
 They Guess employees agreed and they met  On appeal, the CA reversed the decision
at the said place o The Guess employees acted in good
 This is where the employees allegedly faith then they asked Quinones about
humiliated Quinones in front of all the the non payment
clients of Cebu Pacific o However, there was bad faith in
o As they repeatedly accused her that sending the demand letter to
she had not paid for the item Quinones’ employer
o And at one point, they even searched  They did this even though
her wallet to check how much money Quinones had the item and
she had the receipt as evidence of her
 Furthermore, on the same day, the Guess payment
employees gave a letter to the Director of  The letters subjected
Cebu Pacific Air, narrating the Incident – Quinones to humiliation and
refused to receive it because it did not ridicule and even dragged her
concern the office and it took place while employers into it
Quinones was off duty o Hence, the Guess employees are
 The Guess employees also sent a letter to the guilty of abuse of rights and
Cebu Pacific office in Robinson’s – also Quinones is entitles to collect
refused to receive it damages and attorney’s fees
 Lastly, the same letter was furnished to the  The Guess Employees brought up the case
HR Department of Robinson’s with the SC
 These events then prompted Quinones to file  ISSUE: W/N the Guess Employees are
for a Complaint of Damages against guilty of Abuse of Right
California Clothing and the three Guess  RULING: Yes
Employees (Villagonzao, Hawayon, and o The SC stated that any abuse in the
Ybanez) and demanded for moral, nominal, exercise of a right and in the
and exemplary damages, plus attorney’s fees performance of a duty causing
and litigation expenses for the physical damage or injury to another is
anxiety, sleepless nights, mental anguish, actionable under the civil code
fright, serious apprehension, besmirched o The SC cited Article 19, “every
reputation, moral shock and social person must, in the exercise of his
humiliation rights and in the performance of his
 In their defense, the Guess employees stated duties, act with justice, give
that there was a miscommunication among everyone his due and observe
them when the invoice issued a manual honesty and good faith”
receipt. The attested to confronting
 The elements of the abuse of
rights
 There is a legal right
or duty
 Which is exercised in
bad faith
 For the sole intent of
prejudicing or
injuring another
o It was within the right of the Guess
Employees to verify from the
respondent whether she indeed paid
or not and collect from her if she did
not
o However, they abused such right
when they insisted that there was no
payment made despite Quinones
being in possession of the item
purchased and the official receipt
which the employees themselves
issued
o Furthermore, the demand letters sent
to Quinones’ employees were
obviously meant to tarnish her
reputation in the eyes of her
employer
o Hence, Quinones is entitled to an
award of moral damages and
attorney’s fees, according to Article
20 and 21 of the civil code
 Ease her grief and suffering
 Moral damages – 50,000
 Attorney’s fees – 20,000

California Clothing v. Quinones

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

California Clothing v. Quinones

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

California Clothing v. Quinones

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CALIFORNIA CLOTHING V.

QUIONES Quinones and agreeing to meet at the Cebu

You might also like