641 SALES STREET, STA.

CRUZ, MANILA, PHILIPPINES

TORTS AND DAMAGES

(2nd Semester SY 2018-2019)

ATTY. HERBERT CALVIN P. ABUGAN

COURSE OUTLINE

I. GENERAL CONCEPT and HISTORY

II. THE CONCEPT OF QUASI-DELICT

A. Elements

Article 2176, CC

Cases:
Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607
Elcano vs. Hill, 77 SCRA 98
Tayag vs. Alcantara, 98 SCRA 723
Baksh vs. CA, 219 SCRA 115
Dulay vs. CA, 243 SCRA 220 (1995)

B. Distinctions

1. Quasi-delict v. Delict

Article 2177, CC
Article 365, RPC

Cases:
Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607
Cruz vs. CA, 282 SCRA
People vs. Ligon, 152 SCRA 419 (1987)
Philippine Rabbit vs. People, GR No. 147703 (2004)

2. Quasi-delict v. Breach of contract

Articles 1170-1174, CC
Article 1174, CC
Article 2178, CC

Cases:
Cangco vs. Manila Railroad, 38 Phil 768
Far East vs. CA, 241 SCRA 671
Air France vs. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155

1
 PSBA vs. CA, 205 SCRA 729
Syquia vs. CA, 217 SCRA 624
Calalas vs. Sunga, 332 SCRA 356 (2000)

III. NEGLIGENCE

A. Concept of Negligence

1. Definition; Elements

Article 20, CC
Article 1173 CC

Case:
Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil 809

2. Standard of Conduct

2.1. Ordinary prudent person

2.2. Special Cases

Children

Article 12, RPC & Comprehensive Juvenile Justice Law

Cases:
Taylor vs. Manila Railroad, 16 Phil 8
Jarco Marketing vs. CA, GR No. 129792
Del Rosario vs. Manila, 57 Phil 478
Ylarde vs. Aquino, 163 SCRA 697

Experts/Professionals

Article 2187, CC

Cases:
Culion vs. Philippine, GR No. 32611
US vs. Pineda, 37 Phil 456
BPI vs. CA, 216 SCRA 51

Intoxication

Case:
Wright vs. Manila Electric, 28 Phil 122

Insanity

Articles 2180, 2182, CC

Case:
US vs. Baggay, 20 Phil 142

2
B. Degrees of Negligence

Article 2231, CC

Case:
Marinduqe vs. Workmen’s, 99 Phil 48

C. Proof of Negligence

1. Burden of proof

Rule 131, Rules of Court

2. Presumption

Articles 2184-2185, 2188, 1734-1735, CC

3. Res ipsa loquitur

Cases:
Ramos vs. CA, 321 SCRA 584
Batiquin vs. CA, 258 SCRA 334
DM Consunji vs. CA, 357 SCRA 249

D. Defenses

1. Plaintiff’s Negligence

Article 2179, CC

Cases:
Manila Electric vs. Remonquillo, 99 Phil 117 GR No. L-8328 (1956)
PLDT vs. CA, GR No 57079, 178 SCRA 94 (September 29, 1989)

2. Contributory Negligence

Articles 2179, 2214, CC

Cases:
Genobiagon vs. CA, 178 SCRA 422
Rakes vs. Atlantic, GR No 1719 (1907)
Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. CA, 269 SCRA 695

3. Fortuitous Event

Article 1174, CC

Cases:
Juntilla vs. Funtanar, 136 SCRA 624
Hernandez vs. COA, 179 SCRA 39
Gotesco Investment vs. Chatto, 210 SCRA 18
National Power vs. CA, GR Nos. 103442-45 (1993)
Southeastern College vs. CA, GR No. 126389, 292 SCRA 422 (July 10, 1998)

3
 4. Assumption of Risk

Cases:
Ilocos Norte vs. CA, 179 SCRA 5

5. Due diligence

Cases:
Ramos vs. Pepsi, 19 SCRA 289
Metro Manila vs. CA, 223 SCRA 521

6. Prescription

Cases:
Kramer vs. CA, 178 SCRA 518
Allied Banking vs. CA, 178 SCRA 526

7. Double recovery

Article 2177, CC

IV. CAUSATION

A. Proximate Cause

1. Definition

Cases:
Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181(L-10126) (1957)
Fernando vs. CA, 208 SCRA 714 (92087) (1992)
Quezon City vs. Dacara, (150304) (June 15, 2005)

2. Distinguished from other kinds

Remote

Cases:
Gabeto vs. Araneta, 42 Phil 252 (15674) (1921)
Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)

Concurrent

Cases:
Far East Shipping vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30 (130068) (1998)
Sabido vs. Custodio, L-21512 (Aug 31, 1966)

3. Tests

Cases:
Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181
Philippine Rabbit vs. IAC, 189 SCRA 158 (66102-04) (1990)

4
 Cause v. Condition

Cases:
Phoenix vs. IAC, supra
Rodrigueza vs. Manila Railroad, (15688) (November 19, 1921)

B. Efficient Intervening Cause

Cases:
McKee vs. IAC, 211 SCRA 517 (68102) (1992)
Teague vs. Fernandez, 51 SCRA 181 (L-29745) (1973)
Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)

C. Last Clear Chance

Cases:
Bustamante vs. CA, 193 SCRA 603 (89880) (1991)
Pantranco vs. Baesa, 179 SCRA 384 (79050-51) (1989)
Canlas vs. CA, GR No 112160 (February 28 2000)
Consolidated Bank vs. CA, GR No 138569 (September 11, 2003)

V. LIABILITY

A. Possessor of Animals

Article 2183, CC

Case:
Vestil vs. IAC, 179 SCRA 47

B. Things thrown or falling from a building

Article 2193, CC

Case:
Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14

C. Death/Injuries in the course of employment

Article 1711, CC cf 1712

Case:
Afable vs. Singer Sewing Machine, 58 Phil 39

D. Strict Liability/Product Liability

Definition
Article 2187, CC
Articles 50 –52, 97, 99, 106-107, Consumer Act
Sec. 11 RA 3720

5
 Case:
Coca-cola vs. CA, 227 SCRA 293

E. Interference With Contractual Relations

Article 1314, CC

Cases:
Gilchrist vs. Cuddy, 29 Phil 542
So Ping Bun vs. CA, (120554) (September 21, 1999)

F. Liability of Local Government Units

Article 2189, CC

Case:
Guilatco vs. City of Dagupan, (61516) 171 SCRA 382

G. Presumption of Negligence

Articles 2185, 2188, 2190 to 2193, Civil Code

VI. PERSONS LIABLE

A. The Tortfeasor

Articles 2176, 2181, 2194, CC

Article 2184, CC

Cases:
Worcester vs. Ocampo, (5932) 22 Phil 42 (1912)
Caedo vs. Yu Khe Thai, G.R. No. L-20392 (Dec 18 1968)

B. Vicarious Liability

Article 58 PD No. 603

Articles 216, 218- 219, 221, 236, FC
Articles 101-103, RPC
Sec. 6, RA 9344
Articles 2180 – 2182, CC

1. Parents

Cases:
Exconde vs. Capuno, (L-10134) 101 Phil 843 (1957)
Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC, (L-62988) 135 SCRA 242 (1985)
Libi vs. IAC, (70890) 214 SCRA 16 (1990)
Tamargo vs. CA, (85044) 209 SCRA 518 (1992)

2. Guardians

Articles 216 and 218, Family Code

6
 Articles 2180-2181, CC

3. Teachers and Heads of Institutions

Articles 218-219, FC
Article 2180, CC

Cases:
Mercado vs. CA, (L-14342) 108 Phil 414 (1960)
Palisoc vs. Brillantes, (L-29025) 41 SCRA 548 (1971)
St Francis vs. CA, (82465) 194 SCRA 340 (1991)
PSBA vs. CA, 205 (84698) 205 SCRA 729 (1992)
Soliman vs. Tuazon, (66207) 209 SCRA 47 (1992)
St. Mary’s Academy vs. Carpitanos, (143363) (Feb 6 2002)

4. Owners and Managers of Establishments

Philippine Rabbit vs. Phil American, (L-25142) 63 SCRA 231 (1975)

5. Employers

Cases:
Castilex vs. Vasquez, G.R. No. 132266 (Dec 211999)
NPC vs. CA, (119121) 294 SCRA 209 (1998)
Light Rail Transit vs. Navidad, (145804) 397 SCRA 75(2003)
Valenzuela vs. CA, (115024) 253 SCRA 303 (1996)

6. State

Article 2189, CC

Merrit vs. Government, (11154) 34 Phil 311 (1916)

Fontanilla vs. Maliaman, (55963) 194 SCRA 486 (1991)
City of Manila vs. Teotico, (L-23052) 22 SCRA 267 (1968)
Republic vs. Palacio, 23 SCRA 899

C. Others

Article 1723, CC

1. Proprietors of Buildings

Articles 2190- 2192, CC

2. Employees

Araneta vs. Joya, (L-25172) 57 SCRA 59 (1974)

3. Engineer/Architect

Nature of Liability: Joint or Solidary?

Cases:
Lanuzo vs. Ping and Mendoza, 100 SCRA 205 (1980)

7
 VII. TORTS WITH INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION

A. Violation of Civil and Political Rights

Article 32, CC

Cases:
Delfin Lim vs. Ponce de Leon, G.R. No. L-22554 (1975)
Aberca vs. Ver, G.R. No. L-69866 (1988)
MHP Garments vs. CA, 236 SCRA 227

B. Defamation, Fraud, Physical Injuries

Article 33, CC
Articles 353-359, RPC

Cases:
Marcia vs. CA, 205 Phil 147
Madeja vs. Caro, 211 Phil 469
Arafiles vs. Phil Journalists, GR No 135306 (2004)

1. Defamation
MVRS vs. Islamic, GR No 135306, 396 SCRA 210 (January 28, 2003)

2. Fraud
Salta vs. De Veyra, 202 Phil 527

3. Physical Injuries
Capuno vs. Pepsi Cola, G.R. No. L-19331 (1965)
Corpus vs. Paje, G.R. No. L-26737 (1969)
Dulay vs. CA, GR No 108017 (1995)

C. Neglect of Duty

Article 34, CC

D. Action for damages where no independent civil action is provided

Article 35, CC

VIII. INTENTIONAL TORTS

A. Abuse of Rights

Article 19, CC

Cases:
Velayo vs. Shell, 100 Phil 186
Albenson vs. CA, G.R. No. 88694. January 11, 1993.
Amonoy vs. Gutierrez, 351 SCRA 731
BPI vs. CA, 296 SCRA 260

8
 B. Acts contra bonus mores

Article 21, CC

1. Elements

Ruiz vs. Secretary, GR No. L-15526 (1963)

2. Examples

a. Breach of promise to marry, Seduction and Sexual Assault

Bunag vs. CA, 211 SCRA 441

Constantino vs. Medez, GR No 5722 (1992)
Quimiguing vs. Icao, 34 SCRA 132
Pe vs. Pe, GR No. L-17396 (1962)

b. Malicious prosecution

Article 2219, CC

Lao vs. CA, 325 SCRA 694

Que vs. IAC, 169 SCRA 137
Drilon vs. CA, 270 SCRA 211

c. Public Humiliation

Patricio vs. Leviste, G.R. No. 51832 (1989)

Grand Union vs. Espino, G.R. No. L-48250 (1979)

d. Unjust Dismissal

Singapore Airlines vs. Paño, 122 SCRA 671 (1983)

Medina vs. Castro-Bartolome, G.R. No. L-59825 (1982) 116 SCRA 597

IX. OTHER TORTS

A. Dereliction of Duty

Article 27, CC
Amaro vs. Samanguit, L-14986 July 31, 1962

B. Unfair Competition

Article 28, CC

C. Violation of Human Dignity and Privacy

Article 26, CC
St Louis vs. CA, GR No. L-46061 (1984), 133 SCRA 179 (November 14, 1984)
Concepcion vs. CA, GR No. 120706 (2000), 324 SCRA 85 (January 31, 2000)

9
X. DAMAGES

A. Definition and Concept

Articles 2195, 2197, CC

People vs. Ballesteros, 285 SCRA 438

Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483
Heirs of Borlado vs. CA, G.R. 114118 (2001), 363 SCRA 753

Damnum Absque Injuria

Board of Liquidators vs. Heirs of Kalaw, 20 SCRA 987

B. Kinds of Damages

1. Actual or Compensatory

Articles 2216, 2199, 2200, 205, CC

Algarra vs. Sandejas, 27 Phil 284

a. Kinds

PNOC vs. CA, 297 SCRA 402

Integrated Packing vs. CA, 333 SCRA 170

b. Extent

Articles 2201-2202, CC

c. Certainty

DBP vs. CA, GR No. 118367 (1998)

Fuentes vs.CA, 323 Phil 508 (1996)

d. Damage to property

PNOC vs.CA, supra

e. Personal Injury and Death

Article 2206, CC
Ramos vs. CA, G.R. No. 124354 (1999), 380 SCRA 467 (April 11, 2002)
Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203 SCRA 126

f. Attorney’s Fees
Article 2208, CC
Quirante vs. IAC, G.R. No. 73886, 169 SCRA 769 (January 31, 1989)

g. Interest
Articles 2209-2213, CC
Crismina Garments vs. CA, G.R. No. 128721, 304 SCRA 356 (March 9,
1999)

10
 h. Mitigation of Liability

Articles 2203-2204, 2214, 2215

Cerrano vs. Tan, 38 Phil 392

2. Moral

a. Concept

Article 2217, CC

b. Proof and Proximate Cause

c. Cases where allowed

Articles 2219-2220, CC

i. Unfounded Suits

ii. Labor Cases

iii. Taking of Life

Cases:
Kierulf vs. CA, 269 SCRA 433
Miranda-Ribaya vs. Carbonell, 95 SCRA 672
Francisco vs. GSIS, 7 SCRA 577
Expert Travel vs. CA, G.R. No. 130030 (1999)
J Marketing vs. Sia, 285 SCRA 580
Cometa vs. CA, 301 SCRA 459
Triple Eight vs. NLRC, 299 SCRA 608
People vs. Pirame, 327 SCRA (2000)

d. Factors in determining amount

PNB vs. CA, 266 SCRA 136

Philippine Airlines vs. CA, 275 SCRA 621
Lopez vs. Pan American, 16 SCRA 431
Producer’s Bank vs. CA, GR No 111584, 365 SCRA 326 (Sept.17, 2001)

e. Who may recover

ABS-CBN vs. CA, G.R. No. 128690, 301 SCRA 572 (Jan. 21, 1999)
National Power vs. Philipp Brothers, G.R. No 126204, 369 SCRA 629 (Nov.
20, 2001)

3. Nominal

Articles 2221-2223, CC

Ventanilla vs. Centeno, 1 SCRA 215

Armovit vs. CA, 184 SCRA 476

4. Temperate

11
 Articles 2224-2225, CC

People vs. Singh, 360 SCRA 404

People vs. Plazo, 350 SCRA 433, 161 SCRA 208 (May 9, 1988)

5. Liquidated

Articles 2226-2228, CC

6. Exemplary or Corrective

Articles 2229-2235, CC

PNB vs. CA, 256 SCRA 44

Del Rosario vs. CA, 267 SCRA 158

Textbook:

Aquino, T.A., TORTS AND DAMAGES

12