Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 420 views

    Mallari Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Crispina Reynera
    Mallari Jr. was driving a passenger jeepney that collided with a delivery van while traveling on a highway in Bataan. Mallari Jr. overtook a stopped vehicle by moving into the opposite lane without ensuring it was clear. This violated traffic regulations. The jeepney collided with the delivery van in the opposite lane. A passenger, Reyes, was injured and later died. The court found Mallari Jr. solely negligent for the collision and held he and the jeepney owner liable for Reyes' death for violating traffic rules without overcoming the legal presumption of negligence.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Mallari Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Crispina Reynera
    420 views2 pages
    Mallari Jr. was driving a passenger jeepney that collided with a delivery van while traveling on a highway in Bataan. Mallari Jr. overtook a stopped vehicle by moving into the opposite lane without ensuring it was clear. This violated traffic regulations. The jeepney collided with the delivery van in the opposite lane. A passenger, Reyes, was injured and later died. The court found Mallari Jr. solely negligent for the collision and held he and the jeepney owner liable for Reyes' death for violating traffic rules without overcoming the legal presumption of negligence.

    Original Description:

    -

    Original Title

    Mallari vs CA

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Mallari Jr. was driving a passenger jeepney that collided with a delivery van while traveling on a highway in Bataan. Mallari Jr. overtook a stopped vehicle by moving into the opposite lane without ensuring it was clear. This violated traffic regulations. The jeepney collided with the delivery van in the opposite lane. A passenger, Reyes, was injured and later died. The court found Mallari Jr. solely negligent for the collision and held he and the jeepney owner liable for Reyes' death for violating traffic rules without overcoming the legal presumption of negligence.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    420 views2 pages

    Mallari Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Crispina Reynera
    Mallari Jr. was driving a passenger jeepney that collided with a delivery van while traveling on a highway in Bataan. Mallari Jr. overtook a stopped vehicle by moving into the opposite lane without ensuring it was clear. This violated traffic regulations. The jeepney collided with the delivery van in the opposite lane. A passenger, Reyes, was injured and later died. The court found Mallari Jr. solely negligent for the collision and held he and the jeepney owner liable for Reyes' death for violating traffic rules without overcoming the legal presumption of negligence.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Mallari, Sr. v. Court of Appeals324 SCRA 147 75 Transportation Law Case Digests Facts: Mallari Jr.

    was the driving a passenger jeepney owned by his father, copetitioner herein. The jeep collided with the delivery van of Bulletin Publishing Corp. while travelling on the National Nighway inBataan. Mallari Jr. proceeded to overtake a fiera which had stopped in front of him. He negotiated thecurve and moved in the opposite lane in order to overtake the fiera. As he passed the vehicle he saw thedelivery van of Bulletin and the vehicles collided. The points of collision were the and the left rear portionof the passenger jeepney and the left front side of the delivery van. The 2 right wheels of the delivery vanwere on the right shoulder of the road and pieces of debris from the accident were found scattered alongthe shoulder of the road up to a certain portion of the lane travelled by the passenger jeepney. Theimpact caused the jeepney to turn around and fall on its left side resulting in injuries to its passengersone of whom was Israel Reyes who eventually died due to the gravity of his injuries.The widow of Reyes filed a complaint to recover damages from Mallari, Jr. and Sr. and Bulletinas well. The trial court found that the proximate cause of the collision was the negligence of the driver of t h e B u l l e t i n delivery van, considering the fact that the left front portion of the d e l i v e r y t r u c k h i t a n d bumped the left rear portion of the passenger jeepney. On appeal, the court reversed the decision of thelower court and held that it was Mallari Jr. who was negligent. Hence this petition. Issue: Whether or not petitioners herein should be held liable for the death of Reyes. Held: The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals and held that Mallari Jr. and Sr. who a esponsible for the death of Reyes. The collision was caused by the sole negligence of petitioner AlfredoM a l l a r i J r . w h o a d m i t t e d t h a t i m m e d i a t e l y b e f o r e t h e c o l l i s i o n a n d a f t e r h e r o u n d e d a c u r v e o n t h e highway, he overtook a Fiera which had stopped on his lane and that he had seen the van driven byAngeles before overtaking the Fiera. This act of overtaking was in clear violation of Sec. 41, pars. (a) and(b), of RA 4136 as amended, otherwise known as The Land Transportation and Traffic Code. The rule issettled that a driver abandoning his proper lane for the purpose of overtaking another vehicle in anordinary situation has the duty to see to it that the road is clear and not to proceed if he cannot do so insafety. Article 2185 of the NCC, there is a presumption of negligence on the part of a person driving amotor vehicle if at the time of the mishap he was violating a traffic regulation. Petitioners herein failed topresent satisfactory evidence to overcome this legal presumption. Therefore they shall be liable for the loss of Reyes life.

    You might also like