Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 47 views

    (Case Digest) Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation

    Uploaded by

    Tricia Mae Tolentino
    Cosmos Bottling Corporation staged a 10-kilometer running contest to promote sales of their soft drink. Rommel Abrogar, a 17-year old participant, was tragically hit and killed by a jeepney during the race. His parents sued Cosmos for failing to provide adequate safety measures. The court ruled that the doctrine of assumption of risk applied since road races inherently involve risks of vehicular accidents, as they take place on public roads used by vehicles. Those who voluntarily participate in lawful games and contests assume the ordinary risks involved, so Cosmos was not liable for the fatal accident.

    Copyright:

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

    (Case Digest) Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation

    Uploaded by

    Tricia Mae Tolentino
    47 views1 page
    Cosmos Bottling Corporation staged a 10-kilometer running contest to promote sales of their soft drink. Rommel Abrogar, a 17-year old participant, was tragically hit and killed by a jeepney during the race. His parents sued Cosmos for failing to provide adequate safety measures. The court ruled that the doctrine of assumption of risk applied since road races inherently involve risks of vehicular accidents, as they take place on public roads used by vehicles. Those who voluntarily participate in lawful games and contests assume the ordinary risks involved, so Cosmos was not liable for the fatal accident.

    Original Title

    [Case Digest] Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Cosmos Bottling Corporation staged a 10-kilometer running contest to promote sales of their soft drink. Rommel Abrogar, a 17-year old participant, was tragically hit and killed by a jeepney during the race. His parents sued Cosmos for failing to provide adequate safety measures. The court ruled that the doctrine of assumption of risk applied since road races inherently involve risks of vehicular accidents, as they take place on public roads used by vehicles. Those who voluntarily participate in lawful games and contests assume the ordinary risks involved, so Cosmos was not liable for the fatal accident.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    47 views1 page

    (Case Digest) Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation

    Uploaded by

    Tricia Mae Tolentino
    Cosmos Bottling Corporation staged a 10-kilometer running contest to promote sales of their soft drink. Rommel Abrogar, a 17-year old participant, was tragically hit and killed by a jeepney during the race. His parents sued Cosmos for failing to provide adequate safety measures. The court ruled that the doctrine of assumption of risk applied since road races inherently involve risks of vehicular accidents, as they take place on public roads used by vehicles. Those who voluntarily participate in lawful games and contests assume the ordinary risks involved, so Cosmos was not liable for the fatal accident.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    BULACAN STATE UNIVERSITY

    COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION


    CRIMINAL LAW 1 - CASE DIGEST

    Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation


    G.R.No. 164749 - March 15, 2015
    Bersamin, J.

    FACTS:

    Defendant Cosmos (Cosmos Bottling Firm (Cosmos), a domestic soft-drinks company) staged an
    endurance running contest called the "1st Pop Cola Junior Marathon," which included a 10-kilometer
    track, in conjunction with Intergames to promote the sales of "Pop Cola," starting at the Interim Batasang
    Pambansa (IBP for brevity) and finale at the Quezon Memorial Circle. Plaintiffs' son Rommel (17 years
    old) applied to the defendants for approval to compete in the contest, and after completing the
    defendants' requirements, his application was granted and he was given an official number.

    On June 15, 1980, at the scheduled marathon time, Rommel joined the other runners and ran the
    defendants' route. As it turned out, the plaintiffs (sic) also claimed that the defendants failed to provide
    adequate safety and precautionary measures, as well as to exercise the diligence required by the nature
    of their undertaking, by failing to insulate and protect marathon participants from vehicular and other
    hazards along the marathon route. Rommel was hit by a jeepney that was running along the marathon
    course at the time and died the same day despite hospital care.

    Cosmos denied liability, claiming that it was only a sponsor of the marathon and that its participation was
    limited to providing financial assistance to Intergames;
    that the financial assistance it provided to Intergames, the sole organizer of the marathon, was in
    response to the Government's call to the private sector to help promote sports development and physical
    fitness; and that the petitioners had no cause of action against it.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the doctrine of assumption of risk was applicable to the fatality.

    RULLING:
    Yes. With respect to voluntary participation in a sport, the doctrine of assumption of risk applies to any
    facet of the activity inherent in it and to any open and obvious condition of the place where it is carried on.
    The waiver included vehicular accidents for the simple reason that it was a road race run on public roads
    used by vehicles. Thus, it cannot be denied that vehicular accidents are involved. It was not a track race
    which is held on an oval and insulated from vehicular traffic. In a road race, there is always the risk of
    runners being hit by motor vehicles while they train or compete.

    Furthermore, where a person voluntarily participates in a lawful game or contest, he assumes the ordinary
    risks of such game or contest so as to preclude recovery from the promoter or operator of the game or
    contest for injury or death resulting therefrom. Proprietors of amusements or of places where sports and
    games are played are not insurers of safety of the public nor of their patrons.

    You might also like