G.R. No.

L-25499 February 18, 1970 Mallorca bus and brought them to the provincial hospital of
Pampanga at San Fernando for medical assistance.
VILLA REY TRANSIT, INC., petitioner,  Notwithstanding such assistance, Policronio Quintos, Jr. died at
vs. 3:15 p.m. on the same day, March 17, 1960, due to traumatic shock
THE COURT OF APPEALS, TRINIDAD A. QUINTOS, PRIMA A. due to cerebral injuries.
QUINTOS, AND JULITA A. QUINTOS, respondents.
The private respondents, Trinidad, Prima and Julita, all surnamed Quintos, are the
Laurea and Pison for petitioner. sisters and only surviving heirs of Policronio Quintos Jr., who died single, leaving no
descendants nor ascendants. Said respondents herein brought this action against
Bonifacio M. Abad, Jr. for respondents. herein petitioner, Villa Rey Transit, Inc., as owner and operator of said passenger
bus, bearing Plate No. TPU-14871-Bulacan, for breach of the contract of carriage
between said petitioner and the deceased Policronio Quintos, Jr., to recover the
aggregate sum of P63,750.00 as damages, including attorney's fees. Said petitioner
— defendant in the court of first instance — contended that the mishap was due to a
CONCEPCION, C.J.: fortuitous event, but this pretense was rejected by the trial court and the Court of
Appeals, both of which found that the accident and the death of Policronio had been
Petitioner, Villa Rey Transit, Inc., seeks the review by certiorari of a decision of the due to the negligence of the bus driver, for whom petitioner was liable under its
Court of Appeals affirming that of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan. The contract of carriage with the deceased. In the language of His Honor, the trial Judge:
basic facts are set forth in said decision of the Court of Appeals, from which We
quote: The mishap was not the result of any unforeseeable fortuitous
event or emergency but was the direct result of the negligence of
At about 1:30 in the morning of March 17, 1960, an Izuzu First the driver of the defendant. The defendant must, therefore, respond
Class passenger bus owned and operated by the defendant, bearing for damages resulting from its breach of contract for carriage. As
Plate No. TPU-14871-Bulacan and driven by Laureano Casim, left the complaint alleged a total damage of only P63,750.00 although
Lingayen, Pangasinan, for Manila. Among its paying passengers as elsewhere shown in this decision the damages for wake and
was the deceased, Policronio Quintos, Jr. who sat on the first seat, burial expenses, loss of income, death of the victim, and attorneys
second row, right side of the bus. At about 4:55 o'clock a.m. when fee reach the aggregate of P79,615.95, this Court finds it just that
the vehicle was nearing the northern approach of the Sadsaran said damages be assessed at total of only P63,750.00 as prayed for
Bridge on the national highway in barrio Sto. Domingo, in plaintiffs' amended complaint.
municipality of Minalin, Pampanga, it frontally hit the rear side of
a bullcart filled with hay. As a result the end of a bamboo pole The despositive part of the decision of the trial Court reads:
placed on top of the hayload and tied to the cart to hold it in place,
hit the right side of the windshield of the bus. The protruding end WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the
of the bamboo pole, about 8 feet long from the rear of the bullcart, defendant to pay to the plaintiffs the amount of P63,750.00 as
penetrated through the glass windshield and landed on the face of damages for breach of contract of carriage resulting from the death
Policronio Quintos, Jr. who, because of the impact, fell from his of Policronio Quintos, Jr.
seat and was sprawled on the floor. The pole landed on his left eye
and the bone of the left side of his face was fractured. He suffered
other multiple wounds and was rendered unconscious due, among which, as above indicated, was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Hence, the present
other causes to severe cerebral concussion. A La Mallorca petition for review on certiorari, filed by Villa Rey Transit, Inc.
passenger bus going in the opposite direction towards San
Fernando, Pampanga, reached the scene of the mishap and it was The only issue raised in this appeal is the amount of damages recoverable by private
stopped by Patrolman Felino Bacani of the municipal police force respondents herein. The determination of such amount depends, mainly upon two (2)
of Minalin who, in the meantime, had gone to the scene to factors, namely: (1) the number of years on the basis of which the damages shall be
investigate. Patrolman Bacani placed Policronio Quintos, Jr. and computed and (2) the rate at which the losses sustained by said respondents should
three other injured men who rode on the bullcart aboard the La be fixed.
The first factor was based by the trial court — the view of which was concurred in warrant its disregard and the adoption, in the case at bar, of a purely arbitrary
by the Court of Appeals — upon the life expectancy of Policronio Quintos, Jr., standard, such as a four-year rule. In short, the Court of Appeals has not erred in
which was placed at 33-1/3 years — he being over 29 years of age (or around 30 basing the computation of petitioner's liability upon the life expectancy of Policronio
years for purposes of computation) at the time of his demise — by applying the Quintos, Jr.
formula (2/3 x [80-301 = life expectancy) adopted in the American Expectancy Table
of Mortality or the actuarial of Combined Experience Table of Mortality. Upon the With respect to the rate at which the damages shall be computed, petitioner impugns
other hand, petitioner maintains that the lower courts had erred in adopting said the decision appealed from upon the ground that the damages awarded therein will
formula and in not acting in accordance with Alcantara v. Surro1 in which the have to be paid now, whereas most of those sought to be indemnified will be
damages were computed on a four (4) year basis, despite the fact that the victim suffered years later. This argument is basically true, and this is, perhaps, one of the
therein was 39 years old, at the time of his death, and had a life expectancy of 28.90 reasons why the Alcantara case points out the absence of a "fixed basis" for the
years. ascertainment of the damages recoverable in litigations like the one at bar. Just the
same, the force of the said argument of petitioner herein is offset by the fact that,
The case cited is not, however, controlling in the one at bar. In the Alcantara although payment of the award in the case at bar will have to take place upon the
case, none of the parties had questioned the propriety of the four-year basis adopted finality of the decision therein, the liability of petitioner herein had been fixed at the
by the trial court in making its award of damages. Both parties appealed, but only as rate only of P2,184.00 a year, which is the annual salary of Policronio Quintos, Jr. at
regards the amount thereof. The plaintiffs assailed the non-inclusion, in its the time of his death, as a young "training assistant" in the Bacnotan Cement
computation, of the bonus that the corporation, which was the victim's employer, had Industries, Inc. In other words, unlike the Alcantara case, on which petitioner relies,
awarded to deserving officers and employees, based upon the profits earned less than the lower courts did not consider, in the present case, Policronio's potentiality and
two (2) months before the accident that resulted in his death. The defendants, in turn, capacity to increase his future income. Indeed, upon the conclusion of
objected to the sum awarded for the fourth year, which was treble that of the his training period, he was supposed to have a better job and be promoted from time
previous years, based upon the increases given, in that fourth year, to time, and, hence, to earn more, if not — considering the growing importance of
to other employees of the same corporation. Neither this objection nor said claim for trade, commerce and industry and the concomitant rise in the income level of officers
inclusion of the bonus was sustained by this Court. Accordingly, the same had not and employees 
thereby laid down any rule on the length of time to be used in the computation of therein — much more.
damages. On the contrary, it declared:
At this juncture, it should be noted, also, that We are mainly concerned with the
The determination of the indemnity to be awarded to the heirs of a determination of the losses or damages sustained by the private respondents, as
deceased person has therefore no fixed basis. Much is left to the dependents and intestate heirs of the deceased, and that said damages consist, not of
discretion of the court considering the moral and material the full amount of his earnings, but of the support, they received or would have
damages involved, and so it has been said that "(t)here can be no received from him had he not died in consequence of the negligence of petitioner's
exact or uniform rule for measuring the value of a human life and agent. In fixing the amount of that support, We must reckon with the "necessary
the measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise expenses of his own living", which should be deducted from his earnings. Thus, it
mathematical calculation, but the amount recoverable depends on has been consistently held that earning capacity, as an element of damages to one's
the particular facts and circumstances of each case. The life estate for his death by wrongful act is necessarily his net earning capacity or his
expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is capacity to acquire money, "less the necessary expense for his own living.3 Stated
shorter, is an important factor.' (25 C.J.S. 1241.) Other factors that otherwise, the amount recoverable is not loss of the entire earning, but rather the loss
are usually considered are: (1) pecuniary loss to plaintiff or of that portion of the earnings which the beneficiary would have received.4 In other
beneficiary (25 C.J.S. 1243-1250) ; (2) loss of support (25 C.J.S., words, only net earnings, not gross earning, are to be considered5 that is, the total of
1250-1251); (3) loss of service (25 C.J.S. 1251-1254); (4) loss of the earnings less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings or income6 and
society (25 C.J.S. 1254-1255); (5) mental suffering of beneficiaries less living and other incidental expenses.7
(25 C.J.S., 1258-1259) ; and (6) medical and funeral expenses (26
C.J.S., 1254-1260)."2 All things considered, We are of the opinion that it is fair and reasonable to fix the
deductible living and other expenses of the deceased at the sum of P1,184.00 a year,
Thus, life expectancy is, not only relevant, but, also, an important element in fixing or about P100.00 a month, and that, consequently, the loss sustained by his sisters
the amount recoverable by private respondents herein. Although it is not may be roughly estimated at P1,000.00 a year or P33,333.33 for the 33-1/3 years of
the sole element determinative of said amount, no cogent reason has been given to his life expectancy. To this sum of P33,333.33, the following should be added: (a)
P12,000.00, pursuant to Arts. 104 and 107 of the Revised Penal Code, in relation to damages cannot be arrived at by precise mathematical calculation, but the amount
Article 2206 of our Civil Code, as construed and applied by this Court;8 (b) recoverable depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case. The life
P1,727.95, actually spent by private respondents for medical and burial expenses; expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is shorter, is an
and (c) attorney's fee, which was fixed by the trial court, at P500.00, but which, in important factor.' Other factors that are usually considered are: (1) pecuniary loss to
view of the appeal taken by petitioner herein, first to the Court of Appeals and later plaintiff or beneficiary; (2) loss of support; (3) loss of service; (4) loss of society; (5)
to this Supreme Court, should be increased to P2,500.00. In other words, the amount mental suffering of beneficiaries; and (6) medical and funeral expenses."
adjudged in the decision appealed from should be reduced to the aggregate sum of
P49,561.28, with interest thereon, at the legal rate, from December 29, 1961, date of
the promulgation of the decision of the trial court.
Thus, life expectancy is, not only relevant, but, also, an important element in fixing
Thus modified, said decision and that of the Court of Appeals are hereby affirmed, in
the amount recoverable by private respondents herein. Although it is not the sole
all other respects, with costs against petitioner, Villa Rey Transit, Inc. It is so
ordered. element determinative of said amount, no cogent reason has been given to warrant its
disregard and the adoption, in the case at bar, of a purely arbitrary standard, such as a
four-year rule. In short, the Court of Appeals has not erred in basing the computation
CASE DIGEST
of petitioner's liability upon the life expectancy of Policronio Quintos, Jr.
Villa Rey Transit v. CA
Facts:

(2) With respect to the rate at which the damages shall be computed, petitioner
On March 17, 1960, Policronio Quintos, Jr. was riding the petitioner’s bus, when the impugns the decision appealed from upon the ground that the damages awarded
said bus frontally hit the rear side of a bullcart filled with hay. The protruding end of therein will have to be paid now, whereas most of those sought to be indemnified
the bamboo pole at the rear of the cart penetrated the windshield of the bus and will be suffered years later. This argument is basically true, and this is, perhaps, one
landed at Policronio’s face. He died of traumatic shock due to cerebral injuries. of the reasons why the Alcantara case points out the absence of a "fixed basis" for
Private respondents are sisters and surviving heirs of the deceased. They brought this the ascertainment of the damages recoverable in litigations like the one at bar. Just
action against Villa Rey Transit for breach of contract of carriage. The trial court the same, the force of the said argument of petitioner herein is offset by the fact that,
found that the death was caused by the negligence of the bus driver, for whom although payment of the award in the case at bar will have to take place upon the
petitioner was liable under the contract of carriage with the deceased. finality of the decision therein, the liability of petitioner herein had been fixed at the
rate only of P2,184.00 a year, which is the annual salary of Policronio Quintos, Jr. at
the time of his death, as a young "training assistant" in the Bacnotan Cement
Issues: Industries, Inc. In other words, unlike the Alcantara case, on which petitioner relies,
the lower courts did not consider, in the present case, Policronio's potentiality and
capacity to increase his future income. Indeed, upon the conclusion of his training
(1) The number of years to be used as basis of computation period, he was supposed to have a better job and be promoted from time to time, and,
hence, to earn more, if not considering the growing importance of trade, commerce
(2) The rate at which the losses sustained by respondents should be fixed and industry and the concomitant rise in the income level of officers and employees
therein much more.

Held:

(1) The determination of the indemnity to be awarded to the heirs of a deceased Damages consist, not of the full amount of his earnings, but of the support, they
person has no fixed basis. Much is left to the discretion of the court considering the received or would have received from him had he not died in consequence of the
moral and material damages involved, and so it has been said that "(t)here can be no negligence of petitioner's agent. In fixing the amount of that support, We must
exact or uniform rule for measuring the value of a human life and the measure of reckon with the "necessary expenses of his own living", which should be deducted
from his earnings. Only net earnings, not gross earning, are to be considered that is,
the total of the earnings less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings or
income and less living and other incidental expenses.

All things considered, We are of the opinion that it is fair and reasonable to fix the
deductible living and other expenses of the deceased at the sum of P1,184.00 a year,
or about P100.00 a month, and that, consequently, the loss sustained by his sisters
may be roughly estimated at P1,000.00 a year or P33,333.33 for the 33-1/3 years of
his life expectancy. To this sum of P33,333.33, the following should be added: (a)
P12,000.00, pursuant to Arts. 104 and 107 of the Revised Penal Code, in relation to
Article 2206 of our Civil Code, as construed and applied by this Court; (b)
P1,727.95, actually spent by private respondents for medical and burial expenses;
and (c) attorney's fee, which was fixed by the trial court, at P500.00, but which, in
view of the appeal taken by petitioner herein, first to the Court of Appeals and later
to this Supreme Court, should be increased to P2,500.00. In other words, the amount
adjudged in the decision appealed from should be reduced to the aggregate sum of
P49,561.28, with interest thereon, at the legal rate, from December 29, 1961, date of
the promulgation