LAW NA NAG GOGOVERN NG OBLICON - CIVIL CODE

Title 1. Obligations

Chapter I. General Provisions

Article 1156 to 1162

1. Define obligation- Art. 1156

ARTICLE 1156. An obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do or not to do.

The term obligation is derived from the Latin word “obligatio” which means a “tying” or “binding.”

(1) It is a tie of law or a juridical bond by virtue of which one is bound in favor of another to render
something- and this may consist in giving a thing, doing a certain act, or not doing a certain act.

(2) Manresa defines the term as “a legal relation established between one party and another, whereby
the latter is bound to the fulfillment od prestation which former may demand of him.” (8 Manresa 13.)

2. What kind of obligation is being defined under Art. 1156?

Article  1156 gives the Civil Code definition of obligation, in its passive aspect. Our law merely

stresses the duty of the debtor or obligor (he who has the duty of giving, doing, or not doing) when it
speaks of obligation as a juridical necessity.

The definition is in its passive aspect

3. Define juridical necessity- may court action pwedeng magdemanda si creditor kay debtor

Obligation is a juridical necessity because in case of non-compliance, the courts of justice may be
called upon to enforce its fulfillment or, in default thereof, the economic value that it represents. In a
proper case, the debtor may also be made liable for damages, which represent the sum of money given
as a compensation for the injury or harm suffered by the creditor or oblige (he who has the right to the
performance of the obligation) for the violation of his rights.

In other words, the debtor must comply with his obligation whether he likes it or not; otherwise,
his failure will be visited with some harmful or undesirable legal consequences. If obligations were not
made enforceable, then people can disregard them with impunity. If an obligation cannot be enforced, it
may be only a natural obligation.

4. Civil Obligation vs. Natural Obligation

Obligations which give to the creditor or obligee a right of actionin courts of justice to enforce

their performance are known as civil obligations. They are to be distinguished from natural obligations
which, not being based on positive law but on equity and natural law, do not grant a right of action to
enforce their performance although in case of voluntary fulfillment by the debtor, the latter may not
recover what has been delivered or rendered by reason thereof.
(Art.* 1423.) Natural obligations are discussed under the Title dealing with “Natural Obligations.” (Title
III, Arts. 1423-1430.)

5. Essential elements of obligation- existence of obligation

 An obligation as defined in Article 1156 is constituted upon theconcurrence of the four (4)
essential elements thereof, namely:

 (1) A passive subject (called debtor or obligor) or the person who is bound to the fulfillment of the
obligation; he who has a duty;

 (2) An active subject (called creditor or obligee) or the person who is entitled to demand the fulfillment
of the obligation; he who has a right; 

(3) Object or prestation (subject matter of the obligation) or the con-duct required to be observed by the
debtor. It may consist in giving, doing, or not doing. (see Art. 1232.) Without the prestation, there is
nothing to perform. In bilateral obligations (see Art. 1191.), the parties are reciprocally debtors and
creditors; and

 (4) A juridical or legal tie (also called efficient cause) or that which binds or connects the parties to the
obligation. The tie in an obligation can easily be determined by knowing the source of the obligation.
(Art.1157.)

EXAMPLE: Under a building contract, X bound himself to construct a house for Y for P1,000,000.00.

  Here, X is the passive subject, Y is the active subject, the buildingof the house is the object or

prestation, and the agreement or contract, which is the source of the obligation, is the juridical tie. 

Suppose X had already constructed the house and it was theagreement that Y would pay X after

the construction is finished. X, then, becomes the active subject and Y, the passive subject.

6. Form of obligation- Art. 1157- validity of obligation

Manner on how the obligation is manifested

Form of obligation: oral or written

(1) As a general rule, the law does not require any form inobligations arising from contracts for their

validity or binding force. (see Art.1356.) 

(2) Obligations arising from other sources (Art. 1157.) do not have any form at all.

7. Real Obligation vs. Personal Obligation

From the viewpoint of the subject matter, obligation may either be: 

(1) Real obligation (obligation to give) or that in which the subject matter is a thing which the obligor
must deliver to the obligee; or

(2) Personal obligation (obligation to do or not to do) or that in which the subject matter is an act to be
done or not to be done. 

To do- positive personal obligation

Not to do- negative personal obligation

There are thus two (2) kinds of personal obligation: 
(a) Positive personal obligation or obligation to do or to render service (see Art. 1167.); and 

(b) Negative personal obligation or obligation not to do (which naturally includes obligations “not
to give”). (see Art. 1168.)

8. Sources of Obligation

An obligation imposed on a person and the corresponding rightgranted to another must be rooted in at

least any of the following sources:

The enumeration provided on Article 1157 are exclusive

(1) Law. — when they are imposed by the law itself, e.g., obligation to pay taxes; obligation to support
one’s family (see Art. 195, Family Code.); 

(2) Contracts. — when they arise from the stipulation of the parties (Art. 1306.), e.g., the obligation to
repay a loan by virtue of an agreement; 

(3) Quasi-contracts. — when they arise from lawful, voluntary and unilateral acts and which are
enforceable to the end that no one shall be unjustly enriched or benefited at the expense
of another (Art. 2142.), e.g., the obligation to return money paid by mistake or which is not due. (Art.
2154.) In a sense, these obligations may be considered as arising from law;

(4) Crimes or acts or omissions punished by law. — when they arise from civil liability which is the
consequence of a criminal offense (Art.1161.), e.g., the obligation of a thief to return the car stolen by
him; the duty of a killer to indemnify the heirs of his victim; and

(5) Quasi-delicts or torts. — when they arise from damage caused to another through an act or omission,
there being fault or negligence, but no contractual relation exists between the parties (Art. 2176.), e.g.,
the obligation of the head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof to answer for
damages caused by things thrown or falling from the same (Art. 2193.); the obligation of the possessor
of an animal to pay for the damage which it may have caused. (Art. 2183.) 

The enumeration by the law is exclusive; hence, there is noobligation as defined in Article 1156, if its

source is not any of those enumerated.

9. Obligations arising from law

ART. 1158. Obligations derived from law are not presumed. Only those expressly determined

in this Code or in special laws are demandable, and shall be regulated by the precepts of the law
which establishes them; and as to what has not been fore-seen, by the provisions of this Book. (1090)

Kung nakasulat sa batas kung ito ay obligation that obligation is demanded

EXAMPLE: Si pedro bigla siyang siningil ng government, sabi ng gov’t sa kanya pay your income
tax. The question is: Is Pedro have an obligation to pay his income tax? If pedro hindi siya nage-earn ng
income, wala siyang obligation to pay income tax. But what if si Pedro, nage-earn ng income tax ang
tanong automatically ba na si Pedro ay liable to pay income tax? The answer is no because obligations
arising from law are NOT PRESUMED. Hindi mo pwedeng i-presumed na meron siyang obligation to pay
income tax hinid porket meron siyang income kasi if you are going to look for the Tax Code merong
bracket na income in order for you to become liable for income tax. Eh ang kaniyang income lang is 500
for the entire year. The question is, can he be liable to pay for income tax? The answer is no because
obligations arising from law are not presumed only those provided under the law are demandable.

Article 1158 refers to legal obligations or obligations arising fromlaw. They are not presumed

because they are considered a burden upon the obligor. They are the exception, not the rule. To be
demandable, they must be clearly set forth in the law, i.e., the Civil Code or special laws. Thus:

 (1) An employer has no obligation to furnish free legal assistanceto his employees because no law

requires this, and, therefore, an employee may not recover from his employer the amount he may have
paid a lawyer hired by him to recover damages caused to said employee by a stranger or strangers while
in the performance of his duties.(De la Cruz vs. Northern Theatrical Enterprises, 95 Phil. 739 [1954].)

(2) A private school has no legal obligation to provide clothingallowance to its teachers because there is

no law which imposes this obligation upon schools. But a person who wins money in gambling has the
duty to return his winnings to the loser. This obligation is pro-vided by law. (Art. 2014.) 

Under Article 1158, special laws refer to all other laws not contained in the Civil Code.

10. Obligations arising from contract

ART. 1159. Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting

parties and should be complied with in good faith. (1091a)

(1) Binding force. — Obligations arising from contracts are governed primarily by the agreement of the
contracting parties. Once perfected, valid contracts have the force of law between the parties who are
bound to comply therewith in good faith, and neither one may without the consent of the other, renege
therefrom. (Tiu Peck vs. Court of Appeals, 221 SCRA 618 [1993].) In characterizing contracts as having
the force of law between the parties, the law stresses the obligatory nature of a binding and valid
agreement (William Golangco Construction Corporation vs. Phil. Commercial International Bank,485
SCRA 293 [2006].), absent any allegation that it is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or
public policy. (Art. 1306.)

(2) Requirements of a valid contract. — As a source of obligation, a contract must be valid and
enforceable. (see Art. 1403.) A contract is valid (assuming all the essential elements are present, Art.
1318.) if itis not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, and public policy. It is invalid or
void if it is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy. (Art. 1306; see Phoenix
Assurance Co., Ltd. vs. U.S. Lines, 22 SCRA 675 [1968].)

(3) Where contract requires approval by the government. — Where a contract is required to be verified
and approved by the government before it can take effect (e.g., contract for overseas employment
must be approved by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration[POEA] under Art. 21[c] of the
Labor Code), such contract becomes the law between the contracting parties only when approved, and
where there is nothing in it which is contrary to law, etc., its validity must be sustained. (Intetrod
Maritime, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Com-mission, 198 SCRA 318 [1991].) 

(4) Compliance in good faith. — It means compliance or performance in accordance with the stipulations
or terms of the contract or agreement. Good faith and fair dealing must be observed to prevent one
party from taking unfair advantage over the other. Evasion by a party of legitimate obligations after
receiving the benefits under the contract would constitute unjust enrichment on his part. (see Royal
Lines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 143 SCRA 608 [1986].) 

(5) Liability for breach of contract. — Although the contract imposes no penalty for its violation, a party
cannot breach it with impunity. Our law on contracts recognizes the principle that actionable
injury inheres in every contractual breach. (Boysaw vs. Interphil Promotions, Inc., 148SCRA 635 [1987];
see Arts. 1170, 1191.) Interest may, in the discretion of the court, on equitable grounds, be allowed
upon damages awarded for breach of contract. (see Art. 2210.)

(6) Preservation of interest of promisee. — A breach upon the contract confers upon the injured party
a valid cause for recovering that which may have been lost or suffered. The remedy serves to preserve
the interest of the promisee of having the benefit of his bargain, or in being reimbursed for loss caused
by reliance on the contract, or in having restored to him any benefit that he has conferred on the other
party.

11. Define contract- Article 1305

Definition of contract- article 1305

Contract is a meeting of minds between two people were by 1 binds themselves

Have the force law

Complied with in good faith

Not above the law- Article 1306

A contract is a meeting of minds between two persons whereby one binds himself, with respect
to the other, to give something or to render some service. (Art. 1305.) It is the formal expression by the
parties of their rights and obligations they have agreed upon with respect to each other.

12. Obligations arising from quasi-contract- Article 1160

Article 1160 treats of obligations arising from quasi-contracts or contracts implied in law.

A quasi-contract is that juridical relation resulting from certain lawful, voluntary and unilateral
acts by virtue of which the parties become bound to each other to the end that no one will be unjustly
enriched or benefited at the expense of another. (Art. 2142.)

- Hindi ka pwedeng makinabang kung may ibang tao na ma-aagrabyado

It is not, properly, a contract at all. In a contract, there is a meeting of the minds or consent; the
parties must have deliberately entered into a formal agreement. In a quasi-contract, there is no consent
but the same is supplied by fiction of law. In other words, the law considers the parties as having
entered into a contract, irrespective of their intention, to prevent injustice. Corollarily, if one who claims
having enriched somebody has done so pursuant to a contract with a third party, his cause of action
should be against the latter, who, in turn, may, if there is any ground therefor, seek relief against the
party benefited. (Cruz vs. J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc., 76 SCRA 543 [1977].)

Quasi-contracts are governed by the Civil Code, more particularly, by Articles 2142-2175,
Chapter I, Title XVII.
 ART. 1160. Obligations derived from quasi-contracts shall be subject to the provisions of
Chapter 1, Title XVII, of this Book. (n)

A quasi-delict is an act or omission by a person which causes damage to another giving rise to an
obligation to pay for the damage done, there being fault or negligence but there is no pre-existing
contractual relation between the parties.

13. Define quasi-contract- Article 2142

A quasi-contract is that juridical relation resulting from certain lawful, voluntary and unilateral
acts by virtue of which the parties become bound to each other to the end that no one will be unjustly
enriched or benefited at the expense of another. (Art. 2142.)

14. Kinds of quasi-contract:

a. Negotiorum gestio- Article 2144

(1) Negotiorum  gestio is the voluntary management of the property or affairs of another without the
knowledge or consent of the latter. (Art. 2144.) Thus, if through the efforts of X, a neighbor, the house of
Y was saved from being burned, Y has the obligation to reimburse X for the expenses X incurred
although Y did not actually give his consent to the act of X in saving his house on the principle of quasi-
contract. 

Kunwari si pedro may farm and inabandoned ung farm w/o appointing any person to take care of the
farm ung kapitbahay nag alaga tapos lumago na ung farm pwede na ibenta

Si pedro umuwi tho di niya inassign

This juridical relation does not arise in either of these instances:

(a) When the property or business is not neglected or abandoned, in which case the provisions
of the Civil Code regarding unauthorized contracts (Arts. 1317, 1403[1], 1404.) shall govern; or 

(b) If, in fact, the manager has been tacitly authorized by the owner, in which case the rules on

agency shall govern. (Art.2144.)

b. Solutio indebiti- Article 2154

2) Solutio indebiti  is the juridical relation which is created when something is received when there is no
right to demand it and it was unduly delivered through mistake. (Art. 2154.) The obligation to pay
money mistakenly paid arises from the moment said payment was made, and not from the time the
payee admits the obligation to reimburse. (Comm. of Internal Revenue vs. Esso Standard Eastern, Inc.,
172 SCRA 364 [1989].) Under the principle, the government has to restore (credit or refund) to the
taxpayer the amounts representing Art. 1160 GENERAL PROVISIONS erroneous payments of taxes. (Phil.
Geothermal, Inc. vs. Comm. Of Internal Revenue, 465 SCRA 308 [2005].) The quasi-contract of solution
indebiti is based on the ancient principle that no one shall enrich himself unjustly at the expense of
another. 

Solutio indebiti applies where: 

(a) payment is made when there exists no binding relation between
the payor, who has no duty to pay, and the person who received the payment; and 

(b) the payment is made through mistake and not through liberality or some other cause. 

Sa jeep pamasahe 9 pesos ang bayad, ang binigay mo 20 pesos akala ng driver 50 pesos binayad mo and
nareceive mo sobra. May obligation ka ba to return sa driver ung sukli. It is requirement upon you to
return the sukli because it is an obligation.

15. Other kinds of quasi-contract- Article 2164 to 2175

Art. 2164. When, without the knowledge of the person obliged to give support, it is given by a stranger,
the latter shall have a right to claim the same from the former, unless it appears that he gave it out of
piety and without intention of being repaid. (1894a)

Art. 2165. When funeral expenses are borne by a third person, without the knowledge of those relatives
who were obliged to give support to the deceased, said relatives shall reimburse the third person,
should the latter claim reimbursement. (1894a)

Art. 2166. When the person obliged to support an orphan, or an insane or other indigent person unjustly
refuses to give support to the latter, any third person may furnish support to the needy individual, with
right of reimbursement from the person obliged to give support. The provisions of this article apply
when the father or mother of a child under eighteen years of age unjustly refuses to support him.

Art. 2167. When through an accident or other cause a person is injured or becomes seriously ill, and he
is treated or helped while he is not in a condition to give consent to a contract, he shall be liable to pay
for the services of the physician or other person aiding him, unless the service has been rendered out of
pure generosity.

Art. 2168. When during a fire, flood, storm, or other calamity, property is saved from destruction by
another person without the knowledge of the owner, the latter is bound to pay the former just
compensation.

Art. 2169. When the government, upon the failure of any person to comply with health or safety
regulations concerning property, undertakes to do the necessary work, even over his objection, he shall
be liable to pay the expenses.

Art. 2170. When by accident or other fortuitous event, movables separately pertaining to two or more
persons are commingled or confused, the rules on co-ownership shall be applicable.

Art. 2171. The rights and obligations of the finder of lost personal property shall be governed by Articles
719 and 720.

Art. 2172. The right of every possessor in good faith to reimbursement for necessary and useful
expenses is governed by Article 546.

Art. 2173. When a third person, without the knowledge of the debtor, pays the debt, the rights of the
former are governed by Articles 1236 and 1237.
Art. 2174. When in a small community a nationality of the inhabitants of age decide upon a measure for
protection against lawlessness, fire, flood, storm or other calamity, anyone who objects to the plan and
refuses to contribute to the expenses but is benefited by the project as executed shall be liable to pay
his share of said expenses.

Art. 2175. Any person who is constrained to pay the taxes of another shall be entitled to reimbursement
from the latter.

16. Obligations arising from acts or omissions punished by law- Article 1161

Also known as crime or delict

When a person is criminally liable, he is also civilly liable. Article 100 RPC

Delicts or acts or omissions punished by law as a source of obligations

Acta or omission punished by law is knows as Delict or Felony or Crime

- While an act or omission is felonious because it is punished by law, the criminal act gives rise to civil
liability as it caused damage to another.

Example:

I commited a crime of carnapping and suddenly hinabol ng pulis nabangga ung car sa poste kinasuhan
ako ng carnapping. What is the criminal liability? Imprisonment. Requirement upon you to return. Yung
nakabangga siya rin magbabayad ng paayos. If grab car ung ninakaw pwdeng siya magabayad ng kita ng
grab for 1 month kapag sinabi ng judge saa court.

Civil liability arising from delicts:

1. Restitution- which is the restoration of or returning the object of the crime to the injured party.

2. Reparation- which is the payment by the offender of the value of the object of the crime, when such
object cannot be returned to the injured party.

3. Indemnification- the consequential damages which includes the payment of other damages that may
have been caused to the injures party.

17. Obligations arising from quasi- delict- Article 1162

Quasi delicts also known as CIVIL NEGLIGENCE or CULPA AQUILIANA OR TORTS

Art. 1162. Obligations derived from quasi-delicts shall be governed by the provisions of Chapter 2, Title
XVII of this Book, and by special laws. (1093a)

Article 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is
obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
(1902a) DEFINITION
Article 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely separate and
distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot
recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant. (n)

Article 2178. The provisions of articles 1172 to 1174 are also applicable to a quasi-delict. (n)

Article 2179. When the plaintiff's own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause of his injury,
he cannot recover damages. But if his negligence was only contributory, the immediate and proximate
cause of the injury being the defendant's lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the
courts shall mitigate the damages to be awarded. (n)

Article 2180. The obligation imposed by article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or
omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible.

The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are responsible for the damages caused
by the minor children who live in their company.

Guardians are liable for damages caused by the minors or incapacitated persons who are under their
authority and live in their company.

The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages
caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed or on the
occasion of their functions.

Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees and household helpers acting
within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business or
industry.

The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special agent; but not when the damage
has been caused by the official to whom the task done properly pertains, in which case what is provided
in article 2176 shall be applicable.

Lastly, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades shall be liable for damages caused by their
pupils and students or apprentices, so long as they remain in their custody.

The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned prove that
they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage. (1903a)

Article 2181. Whoever pays for the damage caused by his dependents or employees may recover from
the latter what he has paid or delivered in satisfaction of the claim. (1904)

Article 2182. If the minor or insane person causing damage has no parents or guardian, the minor or
insane person shall be answerable with his own property in an action against him where guardian ad
litem shall be appointed. (n)

Article 2183. The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the same is responsible for the
damage which it may cause, although it may escape or be lost. This responsibility shall cease only in case
the damage should come from force majeure or from the fault of the person who has suffered damage.
(1905)
Article 2184. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is solidarily liable with his driver, if the former, who
was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of the due diligence, prevented the misfortune. It is disputably
presumed that a driver was negligent, if he had been found guilty of reckless driving or violating traffic
regulations at least twice within the next preceding two months.

If the owner was not in the motor vehicle, the provisions of article 2180 are applicable. (n)

Article 2185. Unless there is proof to the contrary, it is presumed that a person driving a motor vehicle
has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation. (n)

Article 2186. Every owner of a motor vehicle shall file with the proper government office a bond
executed by a government-controlled corporation or office, to answer for damages to third persons. The
amount of the bond and other terms shall be fixed by the competent public official. (n)

Article 2187. Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles and similar goods shall
be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used, although no
contractual relation exists between them and the consumers. (n)

Article 2188. There is prima facie presumption of negligence on the part of the defendant if the death or
injury results from his possession of dangerous weapons or substances, such as firearms and poison,
except when the possession or use thereof is indispensable in his occupation or business. (n)

Article 2189. Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the death of, or injuries
suffered by, any person by reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings,
and other public works under their control or supervision. (n)

Article 2190. The proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the damages resulting from its
total or partial collapse, if it should be due to the lack of necessary repairs. (1907)

Article 2191. Proprietors shall also be responsible for damages caused:

(1) By the explosion of machinery which has not been taken care of with due diligence, and the
inflammation of explosive substances which have not been kept in a safe and adequate place;

(2) By excessive smoke, which may be harmful to persons or property;

(3) By the falling of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if not caused by force majeure;

(4) By emanations from tubes, canals, sewers or deposits of infectious matter, constructed without
precautions suitable to the place. (1908)

Article 2192. If damage referred to in the two preceding articles should be the result of any defect in the
construction mentioned in article 1723, the third person suffering damages may proceed only against
the engineer or architect or contractor in accordance with said article, within the period therein fixed.
(1909)

Article 2193. The head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof, is responsible for damages
caused by things thrown or falling from the same. (1910)

Article 2194. The responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for quasi-delict is solidary. (n)
18. Define quasi-delict- Article 2176

Quasi-Delicts define in Article 2176 of the Civil Code state:

Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is
obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
(1902a)

19. Requisites of quasi-delict

Before a person can be held liable for quasi-delict, the following requisites must be present:

(1) There must be an act or omission by the defendant;

(2) There must be fault or negligence of the defendant;

(3) There must be damage caused to the plaintiff;

(4) There must be a direct relation or connection of cause and effect between the act or omission and
the damage; and

(5) There is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties.

 Crime Distinguished from Quasi‐delict.  

1. In crime, there is criminal or malicious intent or criminal negligence, while in quasi‐

delict, there is only negligence;  

2. In crime, the purpose is punishment, while in quasi delict, indemnification of the offended party;  

3. Crime affects public interest, while quasi‐delict concerns private interest 

4. In crime, there are generally two liabilities:  criminal and civil, while in quasi-

delict, there is only civil liability;  

5.Criminal liability cannot be compromised or settled by the parties themselves, while

the liability for quasi‐ delict can be compromised as any other civil liability; 

6. In crime, the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, while in quasi‐delict the
fault or negligence of the defendant need only be proved by
preponderance (i.e., superior or greater weight) of evidence.