7-TORTS AND DAMAGES (San Beda) Edited

TORTS AND DAMAGES(San Beda) SJ56
 The omission of that degree of diligence which is required by the nature of the
TORTS AND DAMAGES obligation and corresponding to the circumstances of persons, time and place.
(Article 1173 Civil Code)
I. TORTS
Kinds of Negligence:
TORT 1. Culpa Contractual (contractual negligence)
 An unlawful violation of private right, not created by contract,  Governed by CC provisions on Obligations and Contracts, particularly Arts.
and which gives rise to an action for damages. 1170 to 1174 of the Civil Code.
 It is an act or omission producing an injury to another, without 2. Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
any previous existing lawful relation of which the said act or  Governed mainly by Art. 2176 of the Civil Code
omission may be said to be a natural outgrowth or incident. 3. Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence)
 Governed by Art. 365 of the Revised Penal Code.
NOTES:
 An unborn child is NOT entitled to damages. (Geluz vs. CA, NOTES:
2SCRA802)  The 3 kinds of negligence furnish separate, distinct, and independent bases of
 Defendants in tort cases can either be natural or artificial liability or causes of action.
beings. Corporations are civilly liable in the same manner as  A single act or omission may give rise to two or more causes of action.
natural persons.
 Any person who has been injured by reason of a tortious
conduct can sue the tortfeasor. Culpa Contractual Culpa Aquiliana
 The primary purpose of a tort action is to provide compensation
to a person who was injured by the tortious conduct of the The foundation of the liability of the It is a separate source of obligation
defendant. defendant is the contract independent of contract
 Preventive remedy is available in some cases.
Classes of Torts:
Culpa Aquiliana Crime
A. Negligent Torts
B. Intentional Torts
C. Strict Liability Only involves private concern Affect the public interest
The Civil Code by means of indem- The Revised Penal Code punishes
A. NEGLIGENT TORTS nification merely repairs the or corrects criminal act
 Involve voluntary acts or omissions which result in injury to damage
others without intending to cause the same or because the
actor fails to exercise due care in performing such acts or Includes all acts in which any kind Punished only if there is a penal law
omissions. of fault or negligence intervenes clearly covering them
NEGLIGENCE
1
 The determination of negligence is a question of foresight on the part if the actor

Liability is direct and primary in Liability of the employer of the actor- - foreseeability
quasi-delict employee is subsidiary in crimes  even if a particular injury was not foreseeable, the risk is still foreseeable if
possibility of injury is foreseeable
Calculation of Risk
 Interests are to be balanced only in the sense that the purposes of the actor, the
nature of his act and the harm that may result from action or inaction are
elements to be considered.
QUASI-DELICT
 Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there Circumstances to determine negligence and/or foreseeability of negligence:
being fault or negligence is obliged to pay for the damage 1. Time
done. (Article 2176 Civil Code) 2. Place
3. Emergency
 Emergency rule
Essential Requisites for a quasi-delictual action: GENERAL RULE: An individual who suddenly finds himself in a situation of
1. Act or omission constituting fault or negligence; danger and is required to act without much time to consider the best means that
2. Damage caused by the said act or omission; and may be adopted to avoid the impending danger is not guilty of negligence if he
3. Causal relation between the damage and the act or omission fails to undertake what subsequently and upon reflection may appear to be a
better solution.
Tests of Negligence EXCEPTION: When the emergency was brought by the individual’s own
1. Did the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use the negligence (Valenzuela vs. CA 253 SCRA 303).
reasonable care and caution which an ordinarily prudent 4. Gravity of Harm to be avoided
person would have used in the same situation? 5. Alternative Course of Action
 If not then he is guilty of negligence.  If the alternative presented to the actor is too costly, the harm that may result
may be still be considered unforeseeable to a reasonable man.
2. Could a prudent man, in the case under consideration, foresee
6. Social value or utility of activity
harm as a result of the course pursued?
7. Person exposed to the risk
 If so, it was the duty of the actor to take precautions to
 A good father of a family (pater familias) is the standard of conduct used in the
guard against harm
Philippines. It is a man of ordinary intelligence and prudence or ordinary
reasonable prudent man.
NOTES:
 Negligence is a conduct - the determination of the existence of Attributes of a Good Father of a Family:
negligence is concerned with what the defendant did or did not  A reasonable man is deemed to have knowledge of facts that a man should be
do expected to know based on ordinary human experience (PNR vs. IAC, 217
 The state of mind of the actor is not important; good faith or SCRA 409).
use of sound judgment is immaterial. The existence of  A prudent man should also be expected to know the basic laws of nature and
negligence in a given case is not determined by reference physics, like gravity, etc.
to the personal judgment but by the behavior of the actor in
the situation before him (Picart vs. Smith) SPECIAL RULES
 Negligence is a conduct that creates an undue risk of harm to 1. Children
others.
2
 The action of the child will not necessarily be judged according a. Banks, by the very nature of their work, are expected to exercise the highest
to the standard of an adult. But if the minor is mature enough degree of diligence in the selection and supervision of their employees.
to understand and appreciate the nature and consequence of b. Common carriers are required to exercise extraordinary diligence in the
his actions, he will be considered negligent if he fails to vigilance over their passengers and transported goods (Article 1733 Civil
exercise due care and precaution in the commission of such Code).
acts.
5. Intoxication
GENERAL RULE: Mere intoxication is not negligence, nor does the mere fact of
NOTE: The law fixes no arbitrary age at which a minor can be said intoxication establish want of ordinary care. But it may be one of the circumstances to
to have the necessary capacity to understand and appreciate the be considered to prove negligence.
nature and consequence of his acts. (Taylor vs. Meralco, 16 Phil 8) EXCEPTION: Under Art. 2185 of the Civil Code, it is presumed that a person
driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was
NOTE: Applying the provisions of the Revised Penal Code, Judge violating any traffic regulation
Sangco takes the view that a child who is 9 or below is conclusively
presumed to be incapable of negligence. In the other hand, if the
child is above 9 years but below 15, there is a disputable 6. Insanity
presumption of absence of negligence.  The insanity of a person does not excuse him or his guardian from liability based
on quasi-delict.
2. Physical Disability  Bases for holding an insane person liable for his tort:
 mere weakness of a person will not be an excuse in negligence a. Where one of two innocent persons must suffer a loss, it should be borne by
cases the one who occasioned it
 however if defect amounts to a real disability the standard of b. To induce those interested in the estate of the insane person to restrain and
conduct is that of a reasonable person under such a disability control him
c. The fear that an insanity would lead to false claims of insanity and avoid liability
3. Experts and professionals
 should exhibit the care and skill of one who is ordinarily skilled 7. Women
in the particular field that he is in  In determining the question of contributory negligence in performing such act, the
 when a person holds himself out as being competent to do age, sex, and condition of the passengers are circumstances that necessarily
things requiring professional skill, he will be held liable for affecting the safety of the passenger, and should be considered (Cangco vs.
negligence if he fails to exhibit the care and skill of one Manila Railroad Co. GR No.12191, October 14, 1918).
ordinarily skilled in the particular work which he attempts to do  Although there is no unequivocal statement of the rule, Valenzuela vs. CA
 An expert will not be judged based on what a non-expert can 253SCRA303 appears to require a different standard of care for women under
foresee. the circumstances indicated therein.
 The rule regarding experts is applicable not only to  However, Dean Guido Calabresi believes that there should be a uniform
professionals who have undergone formal education. standard between a man and a woman
4. Nature of activity
 there are activities which by nature impose duties to exercise a Other Factors to Consider in Determining Negligence:
higher degree of diligence A. Violation of Rules and Statutes
Examples: 1. Statutes
GENERAL RULE: violation of a statutory duty is negligence per se (Cipriano vs.
CA, 263SCRA711).
3
EXCEPTIONS: Gross Negligence - Negligence where there is “want of even slight care and
a. when unusual conditions occur and strict observance may diligence.”
defeat the purpose of the rule and may even lead to adverse
results PROOF OF NEGLIGENCE
b. when the statute expressly provides that violation of a GENERAL RULE:
statutory duty merely establishes a presumption of  if the plaintiff alleged in his complaint that he was damaged because of the
negligence. negligent acts of the defendant, the plaintiff has the burden of proving such
negligence (Taylor vs. MERALCO 16Phil8)
 The quantum of proof required is preponderance of evidence (Rule 133
NOTE: Rule as to proof of proximate cause Revised Rules of Court)
GENERAL RULE: Plaintiff must show that the violation of the þEXCEPTIONS: Exceptional cases when the rules or the law provides for cases
statute is the proximate or legal cause of the injury or that it when negligence is presumed.
substantially contributed thereto (Sanitary Steam Laundry, Inc. A. Presumptions of Negligence
vs. CA 300SCRA20). B. Res Ipsa Loquitur
EXCEPTION: In cases where the damage to the plaintiff is the
damage sought to be prevented by the statute. In such cases, A. Presumptions of Negligence
proof of violation of statute and damage to the plaintiff may itself 1. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is presumed negligent if he was in the
establish proximate cause (Teague vs. Fernandez 51SCRA181). vehicle and he could have used due diligence to prevent the misfortune. (Article
2184 Civil Code)
2. Administrative Rule 2. It is disputably presumed that a driver was negligent if he had been found guilty
 violation of a rule promulgated by administrative agencies is of reckless driving or violating traffic regulations at least twice for the next
not negligence per se but may be evidence of negligence preceding two months. (Article 2184 Civil Code)
3. The driver of a motor vehicle is presumed negligent if at the time of the mishap,
3. Private Rules of Conduct. he was violating any traffic regulation. (Article 2185 Civil Code)
 violation of rules imposed by private individuals (e.g. 4. GENERAL RULE: Prima facie presumption of negligence of the defendant
employers) is merely a possible evidence of negligence arises if death or injury results from his possession of dangerous weapons or
substance.
B. Practice and Custom EXCEPTION: When such possession or use is indispensable to his occupation
 Compliance with the practice and custom in a community will or business. (Article 2188 Civil Code)
not automatically result in a finding that the actor is not guilty of 5. GENERAL RULE: Presumption of negligence of the common carrier arises in
negligence. Non-compliance with the practice or custom in the case of loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods, or in case of death or
community does not necessarily mean that the actor was injury of passengers.
negligent. þEXCEPTION: Upon proof of exercise of extraordinary diligence.
C. Compliance with Statutes B. Res Ipsa Loquitur

 Compliance with a statute is not conclusive that there was no  “The thing or transaction speaks for itself.”
negligence.  It is a rule of evidence peculiar to the law of negligence which recognizes that
 Example: A defendant can still be held liable for negligence prima facie negligence may be established in the absence of direct proof, and
even if he can establish that he was driving below the speed furnishes a substitute for specific proof of negligence.
limit. Compliance with the speed limit is not conclusive that he
was not negligently driving his car. Requisites of Res Ipsa Loquitor:
4
1. The accident was of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in GENERAL RULE: The owner has no duty to take reasonable care towards a
the absence of someone’s negligence; trespasser for his protection or even to protect him from concealed danger.
2. The instrumentality which caused the injury was under the EXCEPTIONS:
exclusive control and management of the person charged with a. Visitors and tolerated possession
negligence; and  The owner is still liable if the plaintiff is inside his property by tolerance or by
3. The injury suffered must not have been due to any voluntary implied permission.
action or contribution on the part of the person injured; absence  Owners of buildings or premises owe duty of care to visitors
of explanation by the defendant. b. Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance
 One who maintains on his premises dangerous instrumen-talities or appliances
of a character likely to attract children in play, and who fails to exercise
AFFIRMATIVE DUTIES AND MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES: ordinary care to prevent children from playing therewith or resorting thereto, is
1. Duty to Rescue liable to a child of tender years who is injured thereby, even if the child is
A. Duty to the rescuer technically a trespasser in the premises.
 The defendants are liable for the injuries to persons who NOTE: a swimming pool or pond or reservoir of water is not considered attractive
rescue people in distress because of the acts or omissions nuisance (Hidalgo Enterprises vs. Baladan 91 Phil 488)
of the said defendants.
 There is liability to the rescuer and the law does not c. State of Necessity
discriminate between the rescuer oblivious to the peril and  The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the interference of another with the
the one who counts the cause same if the interference is necessary to avert imminent danger and the
 One who was hurt trying to rescue another who was threatened damage, compared to the damage arising to the owner from the
injured through negligence may recover damages interference, is much greater. (Article 432 Civil Code)
(Santiago vs. De leon CA-GR No.16180-R March 21,  It is also a recognized justifying circumstance under the RPC
1960)  In both the Civil Code and the RPC, the owner may demand from the person
B. Duty to rescue benefited indemnity for the damages
GENERAL RULE: there is no general duty to rescue; a
person is not liable for quasi-delict even if he did not help a Use of properties that injures another
person in distress  An owner cannot use his property in such a manner as to injure the rights of
EXCEPTIONS: a limited duty to rescue is imposed in certain others ( Article 431 Civil Code).
cases:  Hence the exercise of the right of the owner may give rise to an action based on
1. abandonment of persons in danger and abandonment of quasi-delict if the owner negligently exercises such right to the prejudice of
one’s own victim is considered, under certain another
circumstances as a crime against security (Article 275
RPC); and Liability of Proprietors of buildings
2. No driver of a motor vehicle concerned in a vehicular  New Civil Code include provisions that apply to proprietors of a building or
accident shall leave the scene of the accident without structure which involve affirmative duty of due care in maintaining the same:
aiding the victim unless he is excused from doing so Articles 2190 and 2191
(Section 55 RA 4136)  Third persons who suffered damages may proceed only against the engineer or
architect or contractor if the damage referred to in Articles 2190 and 2191should
2. Owners, Proprietors and Possessors of Property be a result of any defect in construction
 Nevertheless, actions for damages can still be maintained under Article 2176 for
damages resulting from proprietor’s failure to exercise due care in the
5
maintenance of his building and that he used his property in  The head surgeon is made liable for everything that goes wrong within the four
such a way that he injured the property of another corners of the operating room
 It enunciates the liability of the surgeon not only for the wrongful acts of those
3. Employers and Employees under his physical control but also those wherein he has extension of control
A. Employers C. Not Warrantors
 In quasi-delictual actions against the employer, the employee  Physicians are not warrantors of cures or insurers against personal injuries or
may use the provisions of the Labor Code which imposes death of the patient
upon the employer certain duties with respect to the proper D. Proof
maintenance of the work place or the provisions of adequate  Expert testimony should be offered to prove that the circumstances are
facilities to ensure the safety of the employees constitutive of conduct falling below the standard of care employed by other
 Articles 1711 and 1712 of the Civil Code impose liability physicians in good standing when performing the same operation.
without fault on the part of the employers  Medical malpractice can also be established by relying on the doctrine of res
B. Employees ipsa loquitor; in which case the need of expert testimony is dispensed with
 employees are bound to exercise due care in the because the injury itself provides the proof of negligence (Ramos vs. CA, GR
performance of their functions for the employers; absence No.124354, December 29, 1999).
such due care, the employee may be held liable  Two pronged evidence:
a. Evidence as to the recognized standards of the medical community in the
4. Banks particular kind of case; and
 The business of banks is one affected by public interest. b. A showing that the physician departed from this standard in his treatment
Because of the nature of its functions, a bank is under  Four elements in medical negligence cases : duty, breach, injury and
obligation to treat the accounts of its depositors with meticulous proximate causation
care, always having in mind the fiduciary nature of their E. Liability of Hospitals and Consultants
relationship.  There is no employer-employee relationship between the hospital and a
physician admitted in the said hospital’s medical staff as an active or visiting
5. Common carriers consultant which would hold the hospital liable solidarily liable for the injury
 From the nature of their business and for reasons of public suffered by a patient under Article 2180 of the Civil Code.(Ramos vs. CA GR
policy, they are bound to exercise extraordinary diligence in the No 124354, April 11, 2002)
vigilance over the goods and the safety of the passengers  The contract between the consultant and the patient is separate and distinct
the contract between the hospital and the patient. The first has for its object
6. Doctors the rendition of medical services by the consultant to the patient, while the
Standard of Care second concerns the provision by the hospital of facilities and services by its
 The proper standard is whether, the physician if a general staff such as nurses and laboratory personnel necessary for the proper
practitioner, has exercised the degree of care and skill of the treatment of the patient. .(Ramos vs. CA GR No 124354, April 11, 2002)
average qualified practitioner, taking into account the
advances in the profession. 7. Lawyers
 A physician who holds himself out as a specialist should be  An attorney is not bound to exercise extraordinary diligence but only a
held to the standard of care and skill of the average member reasonable degree of care and skill, having reference to the business he
of the profession practicing the specialty, taking into account undertakes to do.
the advances in the profession.
B. The Captain of the Ship Doctrine DEFENSES IN NEGLIGENCE CASES
6
Kinds of defenses:  It is applicable if the negligence was on the part of the person for whom the
A. Complete – completely bars recovery plaintiff is responsible, and especially, by negligence of an associate in the
B. Partial – mitigates liability transaction where he was injured
1. Plaintiffs Conduct and Contributory Negligence 3. Fortuitous events

a. Plainiffs own negligence as the proximate cause  Essential requisites:
 When the plaintiffs own negligence was the immediate and a. The cause of the unforeseen and unexpected occurrence, or of the failure of
proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover damages the debtor to comply with his obligation, must be independent of the human
(Article 2179 Civil Code). will;
b. It must be impossible to foresee the event which constitutes the “caso fortuito,”
b. Contributory negligence or if it can be foreseen, it must be impossible to avoid;
 Conduct on the part of the injured party contributing as a c. The occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for the debtor to fulfill
legal cause to the harm he has suffered which falls below the his obligation in a normal manner; and
standard to which he is required to conform for his own d. The obligor must be free from any participation in the aggravation of the injury
protection (Valenzuela vs. CA 253SCRA303) resulting to the creditor.
 If the plaintiffs negligence was only contributory, the þGENERAL RULE: It is a complete defense and a person is not liable if the cause
immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the of the damage is a fortuitous event.
defendant’s lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover þEXCEPTION: It is merely a partial defense and the courts may mitigate the
damages but the courts shall mitigate the damages to be damages if the loss would have resulted in any event (Art. 2215(4) Civil Code).
awarded (Article 2179 Civil Code).
 Doctrine of Comparative Negligence 4. Assumption of Risk
 The relative degree of negligence  Volenti non fit injuria: One is not legally injured if he has consented to the act
of the parties is considered in determining whether and complained of or was willing that it should occur.
to what degree, either should be responsible for his  It is a complete defense.
negligence (apportionment of damages).  Elements:
 This is the doctrine being applied a. The plaintiff must know that the risk is present;
in our jurisdiction wherein the contributory negligence of b. He must further understand its nature; and that
the plaintiff does not completely bar recovery but merely
results in mitigation of liability; it is a partial defense c. His choice to incur it is free and voluntary.
 The court is free to determine the
extent of the mitigation of the defendant’s liability  Kinds:
depend-ing upon the circumstances. a. Express waiver of the right to recover
 There is assumption of risk if the plaintiff, in advance has expressly waived
2. Imputed contributory negligence his right to recover damages for the negligent act of the defendant
 Negligence is imputed if the actor is different from the person NOTE: a person cannot contract away his right to recover damages resulting
who is being made liable. from negligence. Such waiver is contrary to public policy and cannot be allowed.
 The defendant will be subject to mitigated liability even if the However, the waiver contemplated by this prohibition is the waiver of the right to
plaintiff was not himself personally negligent but because the recover before the negligent act was committed.
negligence of another is imputed to the plaintiff If waiver was made after the cause of action accrued, the waiver is valid and
may be construed as a condonation of the obligation.
7
b. Implied Assumptions  An action survives even if the defendant dies during the pendency of the case if
1) Dangerous Conditions the case is an action to recover for an injury to persons or property by reason of
 A person who, knowing that he is exposed to a tort committed by the deceased. It is no defense at all.
dangerous condition voluntarily assumes the risk of such
dangerous condition may not recover from the defendant 6. Prescription
who maintained such dangerous conditions.  An action based on quasi-delict prescribes in four years from the date of the
 Example: A person who main-tained his house near a accident. (Article 1146 Civil Code)
railroad track assumes the usual dangers attendant to
the opera-tion of a locomotive (Rodrigueza vs. Meralco).
2) Contractual Relations Relations Back Doctrine

 There may be implied assump-tion of risk if the plaintiff  An act done at one time is considered by fiction of law to have been done at
entered into a contractual relation with the defendant. By some antecedent period. (Allied Banking Corp vs. CA, 1989)
entering into a relationship freely and voluntarily where  Example: A doctor negligently transfused blood to a patient that was
the negligence of the defendant is obvious, the plaintiff contaminated with HIV. If the effect became apparent only after five (5) years, the
may be found to accept and consent to it. four (4) year prescriptive period should commence only when it was discovered
 Examples:
a) the employees assume the ordinary risks inherent in 7. Involuntariness
the industry in which he is employed  It is a complete defense in quasi-delict cases and the defendant is therefore not
b) when a passenger boards a common carrier, he liable if force was exerted on him. (Aquino, Torts and Damages)
takes the risks incidental to the mode of travel he has  Example: When the defendant was forced to drive his vehicle by armed men. He
taken was, at pain of death, forced to drive at a very fast clip because the armed men
were escaping from the policemen. The defendant cannot be held liable, if a
3) Dangerous Activities bystander is hit as a consequence.
 Persons who voluntarily partici-pate in dangerous
activities assume the risks which are usually present in CAUSATION
such activities.
 Example: A professional athlete is deemed to assume Proximate Cause
the risks of injury to their trade.  that cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury, without which the result would not have
4) Defendant’s negligence occurred
 When the plaintiff is aware of the risk created by the
defendant’s negligence, yet he voluntarily decided to Remote Cause
proceed to encounter it, there is an implied admission.  That cause which some independent force merely took advantage of to
 Example: If the plaintiff has been supplied with a product accomplish something not the natural effect thereof
which he knows to be unsafe, he is deemed to have
assumed the risk of using unsafe product. Nearest Cause
 That cause which is the last link in the chain of events; the nearest in point of
5. Death of the defendant time or relation
 Death of the defendant does not extinguish the obligation  Proximate cause is not necessarily the nearest cause but that which is the
based on quasi-delict. procuring efficient and predominant cause
8
 The conduct is the cause-in-fact of the damage if it was a substantial factor in

Concurrent Causes producing the injuries.
 Where several causes producing the injury are concurrent and 3. NESS Test
each is an efficient cause without which the injury would not  The candidate condition may still be termed as a cause where it is shown to be a
have happened, the injury may be attributed to all or any of the necessary element in just one of several co-present causal set each
causes and recovery may be had against any or all of the independently sufficient for the effect.
responsible persons.
 Where the concurrent or successive negligent acts or Two ways by which co-presence may manifest itself:
omissions of two or more persons, although acting a. Duplicative causation
independently, are in combination the direct and proximate  When two or more sets operate simultaneously to produce the effect; the effect
cause of a single injury to a third person, and it is impossible to is over-determined
determine what proportion each contributed to the injury, either b. Pre-emptive causation
of them is responsible for the whole injury, even though his act  When, though coming about first in time, one causal set trumps another
alone might not have caused the entire injury; they become potential set lurking in the background; the causal potency of the latter is
joint tort-feasors and are solidarily liable for the resulting frustrated
damage under Article 2194 of the Civil Code.
 Multiple causation
NOTE: primary cause remains the proximate cause even if there is  If there are a number of candidate conditions, which, taken one at a time,
an intervening cause which merely cooperated with the primary would not in fact have been sufficient to cause the accident and the accident
cause and which did not break the chain of causation. was a cumulative effect of all the candidate conditions.
Tests of Proximate Cause Policy Tests:

 Two-part test 1. Foreseeability Test
1. Cause-in-fact Test 2. Natural and Probable Consequence Test
2. Policy Test 3. Natural and Ordinary or Direct Consequence Test
NOTE: In determining the proximate cause of the injury, it is first 4. Hindsight Test
necessary to determine if the defendant’s negligence was the 5. Orbit of Risk Test
cause-in-fact of the damage to the plaintiff (Cause-in-fact test) 6. Substantial Factor Test
 If the defendant’s negligence was not the cause-in-fact, the
inquiry stops Policy Tests may be divided into Two Groups:
1. Foresight Perspective/ Foreseeability Tests
 If it is, the inquiry shifts to the question of limit of the
 The defendant is not liable for the unforeseeable consequences of his acts
defendant’s liability (Policy test)
 liability is limited within the risk created by defendants’ negligent acts.
Cause-in-fact Tests
2. Direct Persepective/ Direct Cosequences Tests
1. But-For Test
 The defendant is liable for damages which are beyond the risk.
 The defendant’s conduct is the cause-in-fact if damage would
 Direct consequences are those which follow in sequence from the effect of
not have resulted had there been no negligence on the part of
defendants act upon conditions existing and forces already in operation at the
the defendant. Conversely, defendant’s negligent conduct is
time without intervention of any external forces, which come into active operation
not the cause in fact of the plaintiff’s damage if the accident
later.
could not have been avoided in the absence thereof.
2. Substantial Factor test
9
Tests applied in the Philippines:  A cause is not an intervening cause if it was already in operation at the time the
 New Civil Code has a chapter on Damages which specifies the negligent act is committed.
kind of damage for which the defendant may be held liable and  Foreseeable intervening causes cannot be considered sufficient intervening
the extent of damage to be awarded to the plaintiff. causes.
 Cause-in-fact Tests:  The intervention of unforeseen and unexpected cause is not sufficient to relieve
1. But-for test the wrongdoer from consequences of negligence if such negligence directly and
2. Substantial Factor test proximately cooperates with the independent cause in the resulting injury.
3. NESS test
 Policy test: The directness approach is being applied in this Contributory Negligence
jurisdiction. A. Plaintiff’s negligence is the cause
 Plaintiff’s negligence is not contributory if it is necessary and sufficient to produce
NOTE: The definition of proximate cause which includes the the result
element of foresight is not consistent with the express provision  Examples:
of the Article 2202 of the New Civil Code; a person may be 1. Only the plaintiff was negligent
held liable whether the damage to the plaintiff may be 2. Defendant’s negligence is not a part of the causal set which is a part of the
unforeseen. causal chain
3. Plaintiff’s negligence was pre-emptive in nature
Cause and Conditions
 It is no longer practicable to distinguish between cause and B. Compound Causes
condition.  Plaintiff’s negligence may have duplicative effect, that it, it is sufficient to bring
 The defendant may be liable even if only created conditions, if
about the effect but his negligence occurs simultaneously with the defendant;
the conditions resulted in harm to either person or property
latter’s negligence is equally sufficient but not necessary to bring about the effect
 Examples of Dangerous Conditions:
because damage would still have resulted due to the negligence of the plaintiff
1. Those that are inherently dangerous
2. Those where a person places a thing which is not  Plaintiff’s negligence is not merely contributory because it is a concurring
dangerous in itself in a dangerous position proximate cause
3. Those involving products and other things which are
dangerous because they are defective. C. Part of the same causal set
 Neither plaintiff’s negligence nor defendant’s negligence alone is sufficient to
Efficient Intervening Cause cause the injury; the effect would result only if both are present together with
 one which destroys the causal connection between the normal background conditions
negligent act and the injury and thereby negatives liability  Negligence of the plaintiff cooperated with the negligence of the defendant in
 There is no efficient intervening cause if the force created by order to bring about the injury; determination of proximate cause is only a matter
the negligent act or omission have either: of degree of participation
1. remained active itself, or
2. created another force which remained active until it directly D. Defendant’s Negligence is the Only cause
caused the result, or  Defendant’s negligence was sufficient and necessary to bring about the injury
3. created a new active risk of being acted upon by the active  However, if plaintiff’s negligence increased or aggravated the resulting damage
force that caused the result or injury liability of the defendant should also be mitigated under contributory
NOTES: negligence rule or under the doctrine of avoidable consequences
10
Doctrine of Last Clear Chance or Discovered Peril 4. Where the plaintiff, a passenger, filed an action against a carrier based on
 The negligence of the plaintiff does not preclude a recovery for contract
the negligence of the defendant where it appears that the 5. If the actor, though negligent, was not aware of the danger or risk brought about
defendant, by exercising reasonable care and prudence, might by the prior fraud or negligent act
have avoided injurious consequences to the plaintiff
notwithstanding the plaintiff’s negligence. B. INTENTIONAL TORTS
 Include conduct where the actor desires to cause the consequences of his act or
believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from it.
 They are found in Chapter 2 of the Preliminary Title of the NCC entitled “Human
Alternative Views: Relations”. Although this chapter covers negligent acts, the torts mentioned
1. Prevailing view herein are mostly intentional in nature or torts involving malice or bad faith.
 Doctrine is applicable in this jurisdiction
 Even if plaintiff was guilty of antecedent negligence, the HUMAN RELATIONS
defendant is still liable because he had the last clear chance of 1. Principle of Abuse of Rights (Art. 19)
avoiding the injury  Elements:
a. Legal right or duty;
2. Minority View b. The right or duty is exercised in bad faith; and
 The historical function of the doctrine was to mitigate the c. For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.
harshness of the common law rule of contributory negligence  Example: If the principal unreasonably terminated an agency agreement for
which prevented any recovery at all by the plaintiff who was selfish reasons. (Valenzuela vs. CA, 190 SCRA 1)
also negligent even if his negligence was relatively minor as NOTE: This rule is a departure from the traditional view that a person is not liable for
compared with the wrongful act or omission of the defendant damages resulting from the exercise of ones right
 The doctrine has no role in this jurisdiction where common law
concept of contributory negligence has itself been rejected in 2. Article 20 of the Civil Code
Article 2179 of the Civil Code  Speaks of the general sanction for all other provisions of law which do not
especially provide for their own sanction.
3. Third View NOTE: Article 20 does not distinguish; the act may be done willfully or negligently
 There can be no conflict between the doctrine of last clear
chance and doctrine of comparative negligence if the former is 3. Acts contra bonus mores (Article 21 Civil Code)
viewed as a rule or phrase of proximate cause;  Elements:
a. Act which is legal;
 however, the doctrine of last clear chance is no longer b. The act is contrary to morals, good customs, public order or public policy;
applicable if the force created by the plaintiff’s negligence
and
continues until the happening of the injurious event
c. The act is done with intent to injure
NOTE: damages are recoverable even if no positive law was violated
Cases when the doctrine was held inapplicable (PICCA)
1. If the plaintiff was not negligent
 Kinds:
2. The party charged is required to act instantaneously, and if the
a. Breach of promise to marry
injury cannot be avoided by the application of all the means at
þGENERAL RULE: Breach of promise to marry by itself is not actionable
hand after the peril is or should have been discovered
þEXCEPTION: In cases where there is another act independent of the breach of
3. If defendant’s negligence is a concurrent cause and which was
promise to marry which gives rise to liability:
still in operation up to the time the injury was inflicted
11
1. cases where there was financial damage whatever is built or planted or to compel the builder or planter to purchase the
2. Social humiliation caused to one of the parties, and portion encroached upon
3. where there was moral seduction
NOTES: 2) Trespass to or deprivation of personal property
 Moral seduction, although not punishable, connotes the idea of  In the field of tort, trespass extends to all cases where a person is deprived of
deceit, enticement, superior power or abuse of confidence on his personal property even in the absence of criminal liability
the part of the seducer to which the woman has yielded NOTE: It may cover cases where the defendant was deprived of personal property
(Gashem Shokat Baksh vs. CA) for the purpose of obtaining possession of real property.
 Sexual intercourse is not by itself a basis for recovery;
damages could only be awarded if the sexual intercourse is not 3) Disconnection of electricity or gas service
a product of voluntariness or mutual desire  The right to disconnect and deprive the customer, who unreasonably fails to
pay his bills, of electricity should be exercised in accordance with the law and
b. Seduction without breach of promise to marry rules
 Seduction, by itself, is also an act contrary to morals, good  Example: if a company disconnects the electricity service without prior notice
customs and public policy as required by the rules, the company commits a tort under Article 21
 The defendant is liable if he employed deceit, enticement,
superior power or abuse of confidence in successfully having f. Abortion and Wrongful Death
sexual intercourse with another even if he satisfied his lust  Damages may be recovered by both spouses if:
without promising to marry the offended party 1) the abortion was caused through the physician’s negligence, or
c. Sexual assault 2) was done intentionally without their consent
 Defendant is liable for all forms of sexual assault including  husband of a woman who voluntarily procured her abortion may recover
crimes defined under the RPC as rape, acts of lasciviousness damages from the physician who caused the same on account of distress and
and seduction mental anguish attendant to the loss of the unborn child and the disappointment
of his parental expectation (Geluz vs. CA 2SCRA802)
d. Desertion by a spouse
 A spouse has a legal obligation to live with his/her spouse g. Illegal Dismissal
 If a spouse does not perform his/her duty to the other, he may  The right of the employer to dismiss an employee should not be confused with
be liable for damages for such omission because the same is the manner in which the right is exercised and the effects flowing therefrom;
contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy  if the dismissal was done anti-socially and oppressively, the employer should be
deemed to have violated Article 1701 of the Civil Code (which prohibits acts of
e. Trespass and Deprivation of Property oppression by either capital or labor against the other) and Article 21
 2 Kinds:  An employer may be held liable for damages if the manner of dismissing is
1) Trespass to and/or deprivation of real property contrary to morals good customs and public policy
 Liability for damages under the RPC and Article 451 of the  Example: false imputation of misdeed to justify dismissal or any similar manner
Civil Code requires intent or bad faith of dismissal which is done abusively
 Article 448 of the Civil Code in relation to Article 456 does not
permit action for damages where the builder, planter, or h. Malicious Prosecution
sower acted in good faith. The landowner is limited to the  An action for damages brought by one against another whom a criminal
options given to him under article 448, that is to appropriate prosecution, civil suit, or other legal proceeding has been instituted maliciously
12
and without probable cause, after the termination of such 1. Violation of the right of privacy
prosecution, suit or proceeding in favor of the defendant therein  Reasonableness of a person’s expectation of privacy depends on a two-part
 Elements: test:
1. The fact of the prosecution and the further fact that the a) whether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of
defendant was himself the prosecutor; and that the action privacy
was finally terminated with an acquittal b) whether this expectation is one that the society recognizes as reasonable
2. That in bringing the action, the prosecutor acted without NOTES:
probable cause  þGENERAL RULE: Right to privacy can be invoked only by natural persons;
3. The prosecutor was actuated or impelled by legal malice Juridical persons cannot invoke such right because the entire basis of right to
privacy is an injury to the feelings and sensibilities of a party, a corporation
NOTES: would have no such ground.
 Malice is the inexcusable intent to injure, oppress, vex, annoy þEXCEPTION: Right against unreasona-ble searches and seizure can be
or humiliate invoked by a juridical entity.
 Presence of probable cause signifies absence of malice  þGENERAL RULE: Right to privacy is purely personal in nature, hence:
 Absence of malice signifies good faith on the part of the 1) it can be invoked only by the person whose privacy is claimed to have
defendant; good faith may even be based on mistake of law been violated
2) It can be subject to waiver of the person whose privacy is sought to be
 Acquittal presupposes that a criminal information is filed in
intruded into
court and final judgment rendered dismissing the case;
3) the right ceases upon the death of the person
nevertheless, prior acquittal may include dismissal by the
þEXCEPTION: a privilege may be given to the surviving relatives of a
prosecutor after preliminary investigation (Globe Mackay and
deceased person to protect his memory but the privilege exist for the benefit of
Radio Corp. vs. CA; Manila Gas Corp vs. CA)
the living, to protect their feelings and to prevent the violation of their own rights
in the character and memory of the deceased
i. Public Humiliation
 Damages may be awarded in cases where the plaintiff suffered  Standard to be applied in determining if there was a violation of the right is that
of a person with ordinary sensibilities. It is relative to the customs of time and
humiliation through the positive acts of the defendant directed
place and is determined by the norm of an ordinary person
against the plaintiff
 Four Types of Invasion of Privacy
NOTES:
a. Intrusion upon plaintiff’s seclusion or solitude or
 Under Article 21, damages are recoverable even though no into his private affairs
positive law was violated.  It is not limited to cases where the defendant physically trespassed into
 An action can only prosper when damage, material or another’s property. It includes cases when the defendant invades one’s
otherwise, was suffered by the plaintiff. An action based on privacy by looking from outside (Example: “peeping-tom”).
Articles 19-21 will be dismissed if the plaintiff merely seeks  þGENERAL RULE: there is no invasion of right to privacy when a journalist
“recognition”. records photographs or writes about something that occurs in public places.
 Under Articles 19 and 21, the defendant may likewise be guilty þEXCEPTION: when the acts of the journalist should be to such extent that it
of a tort even if he acted in good faith (Grand Union constitutes harassment or overzealous shadowing
Supermarket vs. Espino)  the freedom of the press has never been construed to accord newsmen
immunity from tort or crimes committed during the course of the
TORTS AGAINST HUMAN DIGNITY newsgathering
Types:
13
 There is no intrusion when an employer investigates an

employee or when the school investigates its student; c. Publicity which places a person in a false light in
the public eye
 The interest to be protected in this tort is the interest of the individual in not
being mad to appear before the public in an objectionable false light or false
NOTE: There are instances where the school might be called position.
upon to exercise its power over its student for acts committed  If the publicity given to the plaintiff is defamatory, hence an action for libel is
outside the school premises and beyond school hours in the also warranted; the action for invasion of privacy will afford an alternative
following: remedy
1. In cases of violation of school policies or regulations  May be committed by the media by distorting a news report.
occurring in connection with school sponsored activity off-
campus; or Tort of Putting Another in False
Defamation
2. In cases where the misconduct of the student involves his Light
status as a student or affects the good name and 1. As to gravamen of claim
reputation of the school. The gravamen of claim is not the The gravamen of claim is the
reputational harm but rather the reputa-tional harm
b. Publication of Embarrassing embarrassment of a person being
Private facts made into some-thing he is not
 Requisites: 2. As to publication
1. Publicity is given to any private or purely personal The statement should be actually Publication is satisfied if a letter is
information about a person; made in public sent to a third person
2. Without the latter’s consent; and 3. As to the defamatory character of the statements
3. Regardless of whether or not such publicity constitutes a Defendant may still be held liable What is published lowers the
criminal offense, like libel or defamation, the circumstance even if the statements tells esteem in which the plaintiff is held
that the publication was made with intent of gain or for something good about the plaintiff
commercial and business purposes invariably serves to
aggravate the violation of the right. d. Commercial appropriation of likeness
 The unwarranted publication of a person’s name or the unauthorized use of
 Public Figure - A person, who by his accomplishments, his photograph or likeness for commercial purposes is an invasion of privacy.
fame or mode of living or by adopting a profession or  With respect to celebrities, however, the right of publicity is often treated as a
calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his separate right that overlaps but is distinct from the right of privacy. They treat
doings, his affairs and his character. their names and likeness as property and they want to control and profit
NOTE: Public figures, most especially those holding therefrom.
responsible positions in government enjoy a more limited
right to privacy compared to ordinary individuals. 2. Interference with Family
 The interest sought to be protected is the right to be free  The gist of the tort is an interference with one spouse’s mental attitude toward
from unwarranted publicity, from the wrongful publicizing of the other and the conjugal kindness of marital relations resulting in some actual
the private affairs and activities of an individual which are conduct which materially affects it.
outside the realm of legitimate public concern.  It extends to all cases of wrongful interference in the family affairs of others
 The publication of facts derived from the records of official whereby one spouse is induced to leave the other spouse or conduct himself or
proceedings which are not otherwise declared by law as herself that the comfort of married life is destroyed.
confidential, cannot be considered a tortious conduct.
14
 If committed by the parents, malice must be proven  Test in determining the defamatory character of the imputation: A charge is
sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose and
3. Intriguing to Cause Alienation understand that the person/s against whom they were uttered were guilty of a
certain offense, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or
to hold the person/s up to public ridicule
4. Vexation and Humiliation  Dissemination to a number of persons is not required, communication to a single
 Discrimination against a person on account of his physical individual is sufficient publication
defect, which causes emotional distress, may result in liability  þGENERAL RULE: Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious,
on the part of the offending party.
even if it be true, if no good intention or justifiable motive for making it is shown
 Sexual Harassment falls under this category
þEXCEPTIONS:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance
TORTS WITH INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS of any legal, moral or social duty; and
1. Violation of civil and political rights (Article 32) 2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks,
 Although the same normally involves intentional acts, it can of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are not of
also be committed through negligence confidential nature, or of any statement, report, or speech delivered in said
 Public officer who is a defendant cannot escape liability under proceedings or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of
the doctrine of state immunity; the said doctrine applies only if their functions
acts involved are done by officers in the performance of their  it is not sufficient that the offended party recognized himself as the person
official duty within the ambit of their powers; officers do not act attacked or defamed, it must be shown that at least a third person could identify
within the ambit of their powers if they violate the constitutional him as the object of the libelous publication
rights of persons  In order to escape liability, the defendant may claim that the statements made
are privileged
2. Defamation, Fraud, and Physical injuries (Article 33)  Two kinds of privilege communication:
A. Defamation 1) Absolutely privilege – those which are not actionable even if the author acted
 Defamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation and good in bad faith
name, by communication to others which tends to diminish the 2) Qualifiedly privilege – not actionalble unless found to have been made
esteem in which the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse without good intention or justifiable motive
feelings or opinion against him B. Fraud
 Includes the crime of libel and slander  Elements of deceit
 RPC considers the statement defamatory if it is an imputation 1) The defendant must have made false representation to the plaintiff
of circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or 2) The representation must be one of fact
contempt of natural or juridical person or to blacken the 3) The defendant must know that the representation is false or be reckless
memory of one who is dead about whether it is false
 Requisites for one to be liable for defamatory imputations: 4) The defendant must have acted on the false representation
a. It must be defamatory 5) The defendant must have intended that the false representation should be
b. It must be malicious acted on
c. It must be given publicity 6) The plaintiff must have suffered damage as a result of acting on the false
d. The victim must be identifiable representation
 Half-truths are likewise included; it is actionable if the withholding of that which is
NOTES: not stated makes that which is stated absolutely false
15
C. Physical injuries A. Death after final judgment: extinguishes criminal liability of the person liable but
 Battery – an intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive will not extinguish the civil liability
bodily contact; bodily contact is offensive if it offends a B. Death before final judgment:
reasonable person’s sense of dignity þGENERAL RULE: The defendant is relieved from liability.
þEXCEPTION: In case of libel and physical injuries wherein the plaintiff initially
 Assault – intentional conduct by one person directed at opted to claim damages in the criminal proceeding can file another case under
another which places the latter in apprehension of immediate Article 33 of the Civil Code
bodily harm or offensive act
 Includes bodily injuries causing death Effect of Pardon
 Physical injuries which resulted because of negligence or  Pardon does not erase civil liability
imprudence is not included in Article 33; they are already  While pardon removes the existence of guilt so that in the eyes of the law the
covered by Article 2176 of the Civil Code offender is deemed innocent and treated as though he never committed the
offence, it does not operate to remove all the effects of the previous convictionm
3. Neglect of duty by police officers (Article 34)
 Subsidiary liability of cities and municipalities, is imposed so
that they will exercise great care in selecting conscientious and DEFENDANTS IN TORT CASES
duly qualified policemen and exercise supervision over them in
the performance of their duties Concurrent Negligence or Acts
1. Joint Tort-feasors
CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM DELICT  all the persons who command, instigate, promote, encourage, advice,
 Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable countenance, cooperate in, aid, or abet the commission of a tort, or who approve
(Article 100 RPC) of it after it is done, if done for their benefit; they are each liable as a principal, to
 Persons liable are the principal, accomplice and accessories the same extent and in the same manner as if they have performed the wrongful
 It includes restitution, reparation of damages and act themselves.
indemnification of consequential damages  The responsibility of two or more persons liable for quasi-delict is solidary (Article
 The rule on proximate cause in quasi-delict cases is applicable 2194 Civil Code); they are not liable pro rata, they are jointly and severally liable
to cases involving civil liability arising from delict for the whole amount.
Circumstances affecting Civil Liability 2. Motor vehicle mishaps

1. Justifying circumstances  the owner is solidarily liable with the driver, if the former, who was in the vehicle,
 defendant is free from civil liability if justifying could have, by the use of due diligence, prevented the misfortune (Article 2184
circumstances are properly establishes Civil Code)
2. Exempting Circumstances  Solidary liability is imposed on the owner not because of his imputed liability but
 They do not erase the civil liability because his own omission is a concurring proximate cause of the injury
3. Mitigating and Aggravating circums-tances
 Damages to be adjudicated may either be decreased or Vicarious Liability or Doctrine of Imputed Negligence
increased depending on the presence of mitigating or
aggravating circumstances
Effect of Death
16
 A person is not only liable for torts committed by himself, but  The liability is present only both under Art 2180 of the NCC and Art 221 of the
also for torts committed by others with whom he has a certain Family Code if the child is living in his parents’ company.
relation or for whom he is responsible. (Article 2180 Civil Code)  Parental authority is not the sole basis of liability. A teacher in charge is still liable
 Exercise of diligence of a good father of a family to prevent for the acts of their students even if the minor student reaches the age of
damage is a defense. majority.
 Doctrine of Respondeat Superior – the liability is strictly  The parents or guardians can still be held liable even if the minor is already
imputed, the employer is liable not because of his act or
emancipated provided that he is below 21 years of age.
omission but because of the act or omission of the employee;
employer cannot escape liability by claiming that he exercised  Parents and other persons exercising parental authority can escape liability by
due diligence in the selection or supervision of the employee. proving that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent
damages. (Art. 2180)
þGENERAL RULE: vicarious liability in the Philippines is not  The burden of proof rests on the parents and persons exercising parental
governed by the doctrine of respondeat superior; employers or authority.
parents are made liable not only because of the negligent or
wrongful act of the person for whom they are responsible but 2. Guardians
also because of their own negligence:  For damage caused by
1) Liability is imposed on the employer because he failed to a. minors or incapacitated persons
exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the b. under their authority
employee c. living in their company
2) Parents are made liable because they failed to exercise
due diligence 3. Owners and managers of establishments
þEXCEPTION: doctrine of respondeat superior is applicable in:  For damage caused by:
1) liability of employers under Article 103 of the RPC a. their employees
2) liability of a partnership for the tort committed by a partner b. in the service of the branches in which they are employed, or
c. on the occasion of their functions
Persons Vicariously Liable: Article 2180 of the Civil Code
(FGOEST) 4. Employers
1. Father, or in case of death or incapacity, mother  For damages cause by:
 For damage caused by: a. employees and household helpers
a) minor children b. acting within the scope of their assigned tasks
b) living in their company c. even if the employer is not engaged in any business or industry
 This has already been modified by Art. 221 of the Family Code
to the extent that the alternative qualification of the liability of NOTES:
the father and the mother has been removed.  Liability of the employer can be established by proving the existence of an
employer-employee relationship with the actor and the latter caused the injury
NOTES: while performing his assigned task or functions.
 The basis of liability for the acts or omissions of their minor  The vicarious liability attaches only when the tortuous conduct of the employees
children is the parental authority that they exercise over them. relates to or is in the course of his employment
 The liability is not limited to parents, the same is also imposed  While the employer incurs no liability when an employee’s conduct, act or
on those exercising substitute and special parental authority, omission is beyond the range of employment, a minor deviation from the
i.e., guardian.
17
assigned task of an employee, however does not affect the þEXCEPTION: It is only the head of the school, not the teacher who is held liable
liability of an employer. (Valenzuela vs. CA, 253 SCRA 303) where the injury is caused in a school of arts and trade.
 it is a defense that the employer exercised proper diligence in  The liability of the teacher subsists whether the school is academic or non-
the selection and supervision of negligent employee. academic.
 Liability is imposed only if the pupil is already in the custody of the teacher or
head. The student is in the custody of the school authorities as longs as he is
under the control and influence of the school and within its premises whether the
semester had not yet begun or has already ended
5. State  The victim of negligence is likewise required to exercise due care in avoiding
 For damage caused by: injury to himself.
a. a special agent
b. not when the damage has been caused by the official to Other Persons Vicariously Liable:
whom the task done properly pertains 1. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers
 Public officers who are guilty of tortuous conduct are personally  they are civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments in cases of
liable for their actions. violations of statutes by them, in default of persons criminally liable (Article 102
Revised Penal Code)
6. Teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades  They are subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
 For damage caused by: within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for payment of the value
a. pupils and students or apprentices thereof, provided that:
b. in their custody a. the innkeeper was notified in advance of the deposit of such goods within the
inn; and
NOTES: b. the guest shall have followed the directions which such innkeeper or his
 Applies also to teachers of academic institutions. representative may have given with respect to the care and vigilance over
 Liability attaches to the teacher-in-charge. the goods.
 The school itself is now solidarily liable with the teacher-in-
charge. 2. Partnership
 Partnership or every partner is liable for torts committed by one of the partners
 the liability extends to acts committed even outside the school acting within the scope of the firm business, though they do not participate in,
so long as it is an official activity of the school ratify, or have knowledge of such torts.
 Whenever the school or teacher is being made liable, the  Partners are liable as joint tort-feasors
parents and those exercising substitute parental authority are  Vicarious liability is similar to the common law rule on respondeat superior;
not free from liability because Art. 219 of the Family Code  Liability is entirely imputed and the partnership cannot obviously invoke diligence
expressly provides that they are subsidiarily liable. in the selection and supervision of the partner
 Art. 2180 makes teachers and heads liable for acts of students
and apprentices whether the latter are minors or not. 3. Spouses
 þGENERAL RULE: The teacher-in-charge is liable for the acts a. absolute community of property
of his students. The school and administrators are not liable.  the absolute community property shall be for liabilities incurred by either
spouses by reason of crime or quasi-delict in case of absence or
18
insufficiency of the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse  Art. 2183 is applicable whether the animal is domestic, domesticated, or wild.
(Article 94 Family Code)
 payments shall be considered advances to be deducted 4. Falling objects
from the share of the debtor spouse upon liquidation of the  The head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof is responsible for
community damages caused by things thrown or falling from the same. (Article 2193 Civil Code)
b. conjugal partnership of gains  The term “head of the family” is not limited to the owner of the building, and it
 þGENERAL RULE: pecuniary indemni-ties imposed upon may even include the lessee thereof. (Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14)
the husband or wife are not chargeable against the
conjugal partnership but against the separate properties of
the wrongdoer
þEXCEPTION: conjugal partnership should be made liable:
1) when the profits have inured to the benefit of the 5. Liability of employers
partnership, or  Article 1711 of the NCC imposes an obligation on owners of enterprises and
other employers to pay for the death or injuries to their employees.
2) if one of the spouses committed the tort while  Liability is strict because it exists even if the cause is purely accidental.
performing a business or if the act was supposed to  If the mishap was due to the employee’s own notorious negligence, or voluntary
benefit the partnership
act or drunkenness, the employer shall not be liable for compensation.
c. regime of separation of property
 When the employee’s lack of due care contributed to his death or injury, the
 each spouse is responsible for his/her separate obligation compensation shall be equitably reduced.
C. STRICT LIABILITY
 If the death or injury is due to the negligence of a fellow-workman the latter and
the employer shall be solidarily liable for compensation.
 When the person is made liable independent of fault or
negligence upon submission of proof of certain facts specified
 If a fellow-worker’s intentional or malicious act is the only cause of the death or
injury, the employer shall not be answerable unless it should be shown that the
by law.
latter did not exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the
NOTE: Strict liability tort can be committed even if reasonable care
plaintiff’s fellow-worker.
was exercised and regardless of the state of mind of the actor at
that time.
6. Nuisance
Types:  Any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything
1. Animals else which:
þGENERAL RULE: The possessor of an animal or whoever may a. Injures or endangers the health or safety of others;
make use of the same is responsible for the damages which it may b. Annoys or offends the senses;
cause although it may escape or be lost. c. Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality;
þEXCEPTION: When the damage was caused by force majeure or
by the person who suffered the damage. (Article 2183 Civil Code) d. Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or
street, or any body of water; or
NOTES:
 If the acts of a third person cannot be foreseen or prevented, e. Hinders or impairs the user of property.(Article 694 Civil Code)
then the situation is similar to that of force majeure and the  There is strict liability on the part of the owner or possessor of the property where
possessor is not liable. (Francisco, Torts and Damages) a nuisance is found because he is obliged to abate the same irrespective of the
presence or absence of fault or negligence.
19
 Every successive owner or possessor of property who fails or  not all expression of opinion are actionable misrepresentations if they are
refuses to abate a nuisance in that property started by a former established to be inaccurate
owner or possessor is liable therefore in the same manner as
the one who created it. (Article 686 Civil Code) 2. Warranties
 the Consumer Act recognizes that the provisions of the Civil Code on conditions
7. Product liability by manufacturers and warranties shall govern all contracts of sale with conditions and warranties
 Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, toilet  retailer shall be subsidiarily liable under the warranty in case of failure of both the
articles and similar goods shall be liable for death or injuries manufacturer and distributor to honor the warranty
caused by any noxious or harmful substances used, although  privity of contract is not necessary
no contractual relation exists. (Article 2187 Civil Code)
3. Negligence
Other cases of liability without fault:  In product liability law, certain standards are already imposed by special laws,
1. Proprietor of a building or structure, for damages resulting from
rules and regulations of proper government agencies; certain acts or omissions
its total or partial collapse, if it should be due to lack of
are expressly prohibited by the statutes thereby making violation thereof
necessary repairs. .
negligence per se
2. Breach of implied warranties.
3. Consumer Act (R.A. 7394) – any Filipino or foreign  it is negligence per se if manufacturer manufactured products which do not
manufacturer, producer and importer, independently of fault comply with the safety standards promulgated by appropriate government
shall be liable for redress for damages caused to consumers by agencies
defects resulting from:
a. design; 4. Delict
b. manufacture;  The liability may be based on criminal negli-gence under the RPC or violation of
c. construction; any special law
d. assembly and erection;
e. formulas and handling and making up; or 5. Strict liability
f. presentation or packing of their products as well as for the  Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles, and similar
insufficient or inadequate information on the use and goods, shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful
hazards thereof. substances used although no contractual relation exists (Article 2187 Civil Code)
4. Even when an act or event causing damage to another’s  Privity of contract is not required
property was not due to the fault or negligence of the  It does not preclude an action based on negligence (quasi-delict) for the same
defendant, the latter shall be liable for indemnity if through the act of using noxious or harmful substances
act or event he was benefited. (Art. 23 Civil Code)  Article 97 and 99 of the Consumer Act imposes liability on defective products and
services upon manufacturers independent of fault.
 Knowledge of the manufacturer is not important; the focus is on the condition of
PRODUCT AND SERVICE LIABILITY
the product and not on the conduct of the manufacturer or seller
Alternative theories on basis of liability
1. Fraud or misrepresentation  Defenses:
20
A. The manufacturer, builder, producer, or importer shall not 2) the actors employ no means of fraud or deception which are regarded as
be liable when it evidences: unfair
1) That it did not place the product on the market  Extent of Liability:
2) That although it did place the product on the market A. Rule in Daywalt vs. La Corporation 39PHIL587
such product had no defect  Defendant cannot be held liable for more than the amount for which the
3) That the consumer of third party is solely at fault contracting party who was induced to break the contract can be held liable
(Article 97 Consumer Act) B. Rule under Article 2201 and 2202 Civil Code
B. The supplier of the services shall not be held liable when it 1) if in bad faith: defendant is liable for all natural and probable consequences of his
is proven: act or omission, whether the same is forseen or unforseen
1) That there is no defect in the service rendered 2) if in good faith: defandant is liable only for consequences that can be foreseen
2) That the consumer of third party is solely at fault
(Article 99 Consumer Act)
2. Interference with prospective advantage

 Requisites: The plaintiff should allege and prove that:  It is a tort committed when there is no contract yet and the defendant is only
1) The product was defective being sued for inducing another not to enter into a contract
2) The product was manufactured by the defendant
3) The defective product was the cause of his injury 3. Unfair competition.
 4 Kinds of defective products  Unfair Competition in agricultural, commercial, or industrial enterprises, or in
1. manufacturing defect labor, through the use of force, intimidation , deceit, machination or any unjust or
2. design defect oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise to a right of action by a person
3. presentation defect who thereby suffers damage (Article 27 Civil Code)
4. absence of appropriate warning  Cases Included:
a. passing off and disparagement of products
b. interference
BUSINESS TORTS c. misappropriation
d. monopolies and predatory pricing
1. Interference of contracts
 Elements: 4. Securities related torts
a. existence of a valid contract  Kinds
b. knowledge on the part of the third person of the existence a. Fraudulent Transactions
of the contract b. Misstatements or Omission of statement of a material fact required to be
c. interference of the third person without legal justification. stated
 The existence of a contract is necessary and the breach must  defendants are free from liability if they can prove that at the time of the
occur because of the alleged act of interference; No action can acquisition the plaintiff knew of the untrue statement or if he was aware of the
be maintained if the contract is void falsity
 malice is not essential  Extent of Damages: not exceeding triple the amount of the transaction
 Elements of privilege to interfere  Prescriptive Period: Action must be brought within 2 years after discovery of
1) the defendant’s purpose is a justifiable one, and facts constituting the cause of action and within 5 yrs after such cause of action
accrued.
21
is necessary in case of moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary

II. DAMAGES damages
 The assessment of such damages, except liquidated ones, is left to the discretion
DAMAGE of the court according to the circumstances of each case.
 The detriment, injury or loss which are occasioned by reason of
fault of another in the property or person. Kinds of damages (MANTLE)
1. Actual or Compensatory
DAMAGES 2. Moral
 The pecuniary compensation, recompense or satisfaction for 3. Nominal
an injury sustained or as otherwise expressed, the pecuniary 4. Temperate or moderate
consequences which the law imposes for the breach of some 5. Liquidated
duty or violation of some rights. 6. Exemplary or corrective
A. Actual or Compensatory Damages

 comprehends not only the value of the loss suffered but also that of the profits
DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA (Damage Without Injury) which the obligee failed to obtain
 A person may have suffered physical hurt or injury, but for as  Classification:
long as no legal injury or wrong has been done, there is no 1. Dano emergente – loss of what a person already possesses
liability. 2. Lucro cessante – failure to receive as a benefit that would have pertained to
 There is no liability even if there is damage because there was him
no injury NOTE: the latter type includes:
 There can be damage without injury. 1. Loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent
personal injury
 In order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of 2. Injury to the plaintiff’s business standing or commercial credit
which he complains, he must establish that such injuries
resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the
 In crimes and quasi-delict, the defendant shall be liable for all damages which
plaintiff are the natural and probable consequences of the act and omission complained
of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have
reasonably foreseen by the defendant (Article 2202 Civil Code)
Injury Damage Damages  the amount should be that which would put plaintiff in the same position as he
Legal invasion of Loss, hurt or The recom-pense or would have been if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is now getting
a legal right harm which compensation awarded his compensation or reparation.
results from the for the damage suffered  To recover damages, the amount of loss must not only be capable of proof but
injury must actually be proven
 Uncertainty as to the precise amount is not necessarily fatal
NOTES:
 A complaint for damages is a personal action. (Baritua vs. CA, Loss of earning capacity:
267 SCRA 331)  Variables considered are:
 Proof of pecuniary loss is necessary to successfully recover 1. life expectancy
actual damages from the defendant. No proof of pecuniary loss 2. net income/earnings
22
NOTE: from judicial or extra-judicial demand under and subject to the provisions
 life expectancy is computed as follows: of Article 1169 of the Civil Code
{ 2/3 x (80-age at death) } 2. When the obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance or money, is
 net earnings is the total of the earnings less expenses breached:
necessary for the creation of such earnings and less living or  an interest on the amount of damages to be awarded may be imposed at
other incidental expenses the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum
 no interest shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages, except
Loss of profits when or until demand can be established with reasonable certainty
 where the demand is established with reasonable certainty, the interest
 may be determined by considering the average profit for the
shall begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or
preceding years multiplied by the number of years during which
extrajudicially
the business was affected by the wrongful act or breach
Doctrine of Avoidable consequences

 A party cannot recover damages flowing from consequences which the party
could reasonably have avoided
 It has a reasonable corollary: a person who reasonably attempts to minimize his
Attorney’s fees damages can recover the expenses that he incurred
 they are actual damages. It is due to the plaintiff and not to the
counsel. Doctrine of Avoidable
Contributory Negligence
 Plaintiff must allege the basis of his claim for attorney’s fees in Consequences
the complaint; the basis should be one of the 11 cases Acts of the plaintiff occur after Plaintiff’s act or omission occurs
specified in Article 2208 of the Civil Code the act or omission of the before or at the time of the act or
defendant omission of the defendant
Interests
B. Moral Damages
 award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory
damages actual damages  includes physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched
reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury
 the rate of interest, as well as the accrual thereof is  No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary
imposed as follows:  þGENERAL RULE: The plaintiff must allege and prove:
1. When the obligation is breached and it consist of payment 1. the factual basis for moral damages; and
of sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money: 2. its causal relation to the defendant’s act
a. The interest due should be that which may have been þEXCEPTION: Moral damages may be awarded to the victim in criminal
stipulated in writing; furthermore, the interest due shall proceed-ings without the need for pleading of proof of the basis thereof
itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially
demanded Requisites for award of moral damages:
b. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall 1. There must be an injury whether physical, mental or psychological, clearly
be 12% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., sustained by the claimant
2. There must be a culpable act or omission.
3. such act or omission is the proximate cause of the injury
4. the damages is predicated on the cases cited in Art.2219
23
NOTE: the award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of F. Exemplary or corrective damages
a corporation because, being an artificial person, it has no feelings,  imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the
no emotions, no senses. It cannot therefore experience physical moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
suffering and mental anguish which can be experienced only by
one having a nervous system G. Requisites for the award of exemplary damages:
1. They are imposed by way of example in addition to compensatory damages and
C. Nominal Damages Imposed only after the claimants right to them has been established
 Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the 2. They cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending
plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded
may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of 3. The act must be accompanied by bad faith or done in wanton, fraudulent,
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him oppressive or malevolent manner
(Article2221 Civil Code)
 small sums fixed by the court without regard to the extent of the
harm done to the injured party
 law presumes damage although actual or compensatory

damages are not proven
 they are damages in name only and are allowed simply in
recognition of a technical injury based on a violation of a legal
right
 Nominal damages cannot co-exist with actual or compensatory
damages
D. Temperate or Moderate Damages

 These are damages, which are more than nominal but less
than compensatory, and may be recovered when the court
finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its
amount cannot be proved with certainty (Article 2224 Civil
Code)
 In cases where the resulting injury might be continuing and
possible future complications directly arising from the injury,
while certain to occur are difficult to predict, temperate
damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or
compensatory damages; in such cases there is no
incompatibility between actual and temperate damages.
E. Liquidated Damages
 those agreed upon by the parties in a contract, to be paid in
case of breach thereof.
24

7-TORTS AND DAMAGES (San Beda) Edited

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7-TORTS AND DAMAGES (San Beda) Edited

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

7-TORTS AND DAMAGES (San Beda) Edited

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TORTS AND DAMAGES(San Beda) SJ56

 The determination of negligence is a question of foresight on the part if the actor

C. Compliance with Statutes B. Res Ipsa Loquitur

1. Plaintiffs Conduct and Contributory Negligence 3. Fortuitous events

2) Contractual Relations Relations Back Doctrine

 The conduct is the cause-in-fact of the damage if it was a substantial factor in

Tests of Proximate Cause Policy Tests:

 There is no intrusion when an employer investigates an

Circumstances affecting Civil Liability 2. Motor vehicle mishaps

2. Interference with prospective advantage

is necessary in case of moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary

A. Actual or Compensatory Damages

Doctrine of Avoidable consequences

 law presumes damage although actual or compensatory

D. Temperate or Moderate Damages

You might also like