Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    Hotel Nikko V Reyes

    Uploaded by

    erosfreuy
    1) Nikko Hotel Manila and Ruby Lim appealed a Court of Appeals decision finding them liable for damages to Roberto Reyes, an entertainer, related to an incident at a hotel party. 2) There were two versions of events - Reyes said he was publicly humiliated when asked to leave, while Lim said she politely asked him to finish eating and then leave due to the guest list. 3) The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding no proof of ill motive or abusive treatment by Lim in asking Reyes to leave, given her experience in the hotel industry.

    Copyright:

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

    Hotel Nikko V Reyes

    Uploaded by

    erosfreuy
    77 views2 pages
    1) Nikko Hotel Manila and Ruby Lim appealed a Court of Appeals decision finding them liable for damages to Roberto Reyes, an entertainer, related to an incident at a hotel party. 2) There were two versions of events - Reyes said he was publicly humiliated when asked to leave, while Lim said she politely asked him to finish eating and then leave due to the guest list. 3) The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding no proof of ill motive or abusive treatment by Lim in asking Reyes to leave, given her experience in the hotel industry.

    Original Description:

    case digest for CIVIL LAW

    Original Title

    Hotel Nikko v Reyes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Nikko Hotel Manila and Ruby Lim appealed a Court of Appeals decision finding them liable for damages to Roberto Reyes, an entertainer, related to an incident at a hotel party. 2) There were two versions of events - Reyes said he was publicly humiliated when asked to leave, while Lim said she politely asked him to finish eating and then leave due to the guest list. 3) The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding no proof of ill motive or abusive treatment by Lim in asking Reyes to leave, given her experience in the hotel industry.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    77 views2 pages

    Hotel Nikko V Reyes

    Uploaded by

    erosfreuy
    1) Nikko Hotel Manila and Ruby Lim appealed a Court of Appeals decision finding them liable for damages to Roberto Reyes, an entertainer, related to an incident at a hotel party. 2) There were two versions of events - Reyes said he was publicly humiliated when asked to leave, while Lim said she politely asked him to finish eating and then leave due to the guest list. 3) The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding no proof of ill motive or abusive treatment by Lim in asking Reyes to leave, given her experience in the hotel industry.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    HOTEL NIKKO V.

    REYES

    Nikko Hotel vs. Reyes


    TITLE: Nikko Hotel Manila vs. Reyes
    CITATION: GR No. 154259, February 28, 2005

    FACTS:

    Petitioners Nikko Hotel Manila and Ruby Lim assailed the decision of the Court of Appeals in
    reversing the decision of RTC of Quezon City. CA held petitioner liable for damages to Roberto
    Reyes aka Amang Bisaya, an entertainment artist.

    There are two versions of the story:


    Mr. Reyes: On the eve of October 13, 1994, Mr. Reyes while having coffee at the lobby of Nikko
    Hotel was approached by Dr. Violet Filart, a friend several years back. According to Mr. Reyes, Dr.
    Filart invited him to join a birthday party at the penthouse for the hotels former General
    Manager, Mr. Tsuruoka. Plaintiff agreed as Dr. Filart agreed to vouch for him and carried a basket
    of fruits, the latters gift. He He lined up at the buffet table as soon as it was ready but to his
    great shock, shame and embarrassment, Ruby Lim, Hotels Executive Secretary, asked him to
    leave in a loud voice enough to be heard by the people around them. He was asked to leave the
    party and a Makati policeman accompanied him to step-out the hotel. All these time, Dr Filart
    ignored him adding to his shame and humiliation.

    Ms. Ruby Lim: She admitted asking Mr. Reyes to leave the party but not in the manner claimed
    by the plaintiff. Ms. Lim approached several people including Dr. Filarts sister, Ms. Zenaida
    Fruto, if Dr. Filart did invite him as the captain waiter told Ms. Lim that Mr. Reyes was with Dr.
    Filarts group. She wasnt able to ask it personally with Dr. Filart since the latter was talking over
    the phone and doesnt want to interrupt her. She asked Mr. Reyes to leave because the
    celebrant specifically ordered that the party should be intimate consisting only of those who part
    of the list. She even asked politely with the plaintiff to finish his food then leave the party.

    During the plaintiffs cross-examination, he was asked how close was Ms. Lim when she
    approached him at the buffet table. Mr. Reyes answered very close because we nearly kissed
    each other. Considering the close proximity, it was Ms. Lims intention to relay the request only
    be heard by him. It was Mr. Reyes who made a scene causing everybody to know what
    happened.
    ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners acted abusively in asking Mr. Reyes to leave the party
    HELD:
    Supreme Court held that petitioners did not act abusively in asking Mr. Reyes to leave the party.
    Plaintiff failed to establish any proof of ill-motive on the part of Ms. Lim who did all the necessary
    precautions to ensure that Mr. Reyes will not be humiliated in requesting him to leave the party.
    Considering almost 20 years of experience in the hotel industry, Ms. Lim is experienced enough

    to know how to handle such matters. Hence, petitioners will not be held liable for damages
    brought under Article 19 and 20 of the Civil Code.

    You might also like