QUAMTO (1987-2019)

DEALINGS WITH UNREGISTERED LANDS

1. Is such a stipulation valid?
(2000 BAR)
2. Distinguish a direct attack from a
Q: Republic Act 1899 authorizes municipalities
collateral attack on a title.
and chartered cities to reclaim foreshore lands
3. If the title in Item XX.A is issued in the
bordering them and to construct thereon
names of the original sellers, would a
adequate docking and harbor facilities.
motion filed by Juan in the same case to
Pursuant thereto, the City of Cavite entered
correct or amend the title in order to
into an agreement with the Fil-Estate Realty
reflect his name as owner considered
Company, authorizing the latter to reclaim 300
be collateral attack? (2015 Bar)
hectares of land from the sea bordering the

city, with 30% of the land to be reclaimed to be
A:
owned by Fil- Estate as compensation for its
1. Yes, because when one who is not the
services. The Solicitor General questioned the
owner of the property sells or alienates it
validity of the agreement on the ground that it
and later the seller or grantor acquires will mean reclaiming land under the sea which
title, such title passes by operation of law is beyond the commerce of man. The City
to the buyer or grantee. (Art. 1434) replies that this is authorized by RA. 1899
2. A direct attack on a title is one where the because it authorizes the construction of docks
action filed is precisely for the purpose of and harbors. Who is correct? (2000 Bar)
pointing out the defects in the title with a
prayer that it be declared void. A collateral A: The Solicitor General is correct. The authority of
attack is one where the action is not the City of Cavite under RA 1899 to reclaim land is
instituted for the purpose of attacking the limited to foreshore lands. The Act did not authorize
title but the nullity of the title is raised as a it to reclaim land from the sea. "The reclamation
defense in a different action.
being unauthorized, the City of Cavite did not
3. No, because Juan is not attacking the title
acquire ownership over the reclaimed land. Not
but merely invoking his right as transferee.
being the owner, it could not have conveyed any
Hence, it does not involve a collateral
portion thereof to the contractor.
attack on the title.


PART XIII – TORTS AND DAMAGES
NON-REGISTRABLE PROPERTIES (2007,
2017 BAR)
Book I – Torts/Quasi-Delicts
Articles 2176 – 2194 (Civil Code)
Q: Bedrock Land & Property Development
Corp. is a development company engaged in
developing and selling subdivisions, DEFINITION, ELEMENTS (1994, 2002, 2010,
condominium units and industrial estates. In 2012, 2013, 2017 , 2019 BAR)
order to replenish its inventories, it
embarked on an aggressive land banking Q: A collision occurred at an intersection
program. It employed "scouts" who roam all involving a bicycle and a taxicab. Both the
over the Philippines to look for and conduct bicycle rider (a businessman then doing his
investigations on prospective sites for morning exercise) and the taxi driver
acquisition and development, whether claimed that the other was at fault. Based on
developed, semi-developed or raw land. The the police report, the bicycle crossed the
management of Bedrock asks you as the intersection first but the taxicab, crossing at
company counsel to prepare a manual a fast clip from the bicycle's left, could not
containing a summary of the pertinent laws brake in time and hit the bicycle's rear
and regulations relating to land registration wheel, toppling it and throwing the bicycle
and acquisition of title to land. The manual rider into the sidewalk 5 meters away.
should include the following items:
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right
1. What is the governing law? knee, sustained when he fell on his right side
2. What properties are not registrable? on the concrete sidewalk. He was
(2007 Bar) hospitalized and was subsequently operated
on, rendering him immobile for 3 weeks and
A: requiring physical rehabilitation for another
1. The governing law is the Land Registration 3 months. In his complaint for damages, the
Act as amended by Property Registration rider prayed for the award of P1,000,000
Decree. (Act 496 as amended by PD 1529) actual damages, P200,000 moral damages,
2. The following properties are not P200,000 exemplary damages, P100,000
registrable: nominal damages and P50,000 attorney's
a. Properties of the Public Dominion; fees.
b. Properties for public use or public
service; Assuming the police report to be correct and
c. Inalienable lands of the public as the lawyer for the bicycle rider, what
domain; evidence (documentary and testimonial) and
d. Military installations, civil and legal arguments will you present in court to
quasi-public lands; and justify the damages that your client claims?
e. All lands not classified as alienable (1994, 2002, 2013 Bar)
and disposable.

131
 CIVIL LAW
A: As lawyer for the bicycle rider, I will present he exercised due diligence (Art. 2176);
in addition to the police report, the medical b. That although the defendant is negligent his
abstracts to the injuries sustained by my client negligence is not the proximate cause of the
as well as copies of receipts of expenses incurred injury (Art. 2179);
in connection with the treatment of his injuries. I c. That the plaintiff's own negligence was the
will also present the testimony of my client and immediate and proximate cause of his injury
perhaps a bystander who witnessed the incident (Art. 2179);
as to the circumstances surrounding the d. That the person vicariously liable has
accident. observed all the diligence of a good father of
a family to prevent damage (Art. 2180); and
As for the legal argument, I will rebut the claim e. That the cause of action has prescribed after
of negligence on my client’s part by presenting the lapses.
evidence that my client has actually crossed the f. The fact that the plaintiff had committed
intersection ahead of the taxicab and it was the contributory negligence is a partial defense.
taxicab driver who rapidly cut the path of the (Art. 2179)
bicycle which caused the collision. Also, even
assuming that there was contributory negligence NOTE: The term quasi-tort is not part of legal
on the part of my client, I will argue that it will developments in civil law. In Philippine legal
not preclude the recovery of damages but may tradition, quasi-delict has been treated as the
only mitigate the damages to which he is closest civil law equivalent of the common law
entitled. tort. In fact, in a number of Supreme Court
decisions, the two terms have been considered
Q: Roberto was in Nikko Hotel when he synonymous. In reality, however, the common
bumped into a friend who was then on her law tort is much broader in scope than the civil
way to a wedding reception being held in law quasi-delict. In recent developments in
said hotel. Roberto alleged that he was then common law, the concept of “quasi-torts” can be
invited by his friend to join her at the considered as the closest common law
wedding reception and carried the basket equivalent of the civil law concept of quasi-
full of fruits which she was bringing to the
delict. This is because it is argued that the
affair. At the reception, the wedding
growing recognition of quasi-torts as a source of
coordinator of the hotel noticed him and
obligation is hinged on the acceptance at
asked him, allegedly in a loud voice, to leave
common law of the civil law principles of quasi-
as he was not in the guest list. He retorted
delict.
that he had been invited to the affair by his
friend, who however denied doing so. Deeply
embarrassed by the incident, Roberto then Q: In January 2018, Mrs. A, a married woman
sued the hotel for damages under Articles 19 on her sixth (6th) month of pregnancy, was
and 21 of the Civil Code. Will Roberto’s action crossing a street when she was suddenly hit
prosper? Explain. (2012 Bar) by a car being recklessly driven by Mr. X. As a
result, Mrs. A sustained serious injuries and
A: It depends. While the hotel has the right to further, suffered an unintentional abortion.
exclude an uninvited guest from the wedding Mrs. A was hospitalized for two (2) months,
reception, that does not give the hotel the license during which she incurred ₱400,000.00 in
to humiliate Roberto. If the wedding coordinator medical fees. Her expenses were all duly
of the hotel acted wrongfully e.g. with abuse of substantiated by official receipts. During the
right, unfairly, or in a manner that exposed two (2)-month period of her confinement,
Roberto to unnecessary ridicule or shame, his she was unable to report for work and earn
action will proper. Otherwise, Roberto’s action any salary, which was established at the rate
of ₱50,000.00 per month. Mrs. A then filed a
will prosper. The hotel is liable for the wrongful
civil case for damages against Mr. X.
acts of its employees.

Q: Define quasi tort. Who are the persons A. Based on the case filed by Mrs. A, what is
liable under quasi torts and what are the the source of Mr. X's obligation to her as a
defenses available to them? (2010 Bar) result of his acts? Explain.
B. May Mrs. A claim actual damages from
A: Quasi-tort is considered as the equivalent of Mr. X? If so, how much can Mrs. A claim?
quasi-delict. Hence the rules of the latter Explain.
C. May Mrs. A claim damages on behalf of
pertaining to persons who can be held liable and
her unborn baby? Explain.
their defenses would also apply.
D. What must Mrs. A prove if she wants to

recover moral damages from Mr. X?
Those liable for quasi-delict include:
(2019 Bar)

1. Those tortfeasors or the person causing
damage to another through fault or A:
negligence (Art. 2176); and
2. Persons vicariously liable under Art. 2180. a. The source of obligation is quasi-delict
because there was no pre-existing
The defenses available include: contractual relations between Mrs. A and
Mr. X who are strangers and there was
a. That the defendant was not negligent or that damage done. For Quasi-Delict to become a

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 132 B A R O P E R A T I O N S

 QUAMTO (1987-2019)
source of an obligation these elements Q: A van owned by Orlando and driven by
should concur (1) there was damage to the Diego, while negotiating a downhill slope of a
plaintiff, (2) there is negligence by act or city road, suddenly gained speed, obviously
omission of which defendant or some beyond the authorized limit in the area, and
person for whose acts he must respond was bumped a car in front of it, causing severe
guilty, (3) in connection of cause and effect damage to the care and serious injuries to its
between such negligence and damage, (4) passengers. Orlando was not in the car at the
there must be no pre-existing contract. In time of the incident. The car owner and the
this case there was a claim for quasi delict injured passengers sued Orlando and Diego
because all of the elements mentioned for damages caused by Diego’s negligence. In
above concur. their defense, Diego claims that the downhill
slope caused the van to gain speed and that,
b. Yes, Mrs. A can claim actual damages as he stepped on the brakes to check the
amounting to P500,000. Under Art. 2199 of acceleration, the brakes locked, causing the
the NCC it provides that except as provided van to go even faster and eventually to hit the
by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to car in front of it. Orlando and Diego contend
actual or compensatory damages only for that the sudden malfunction of the van’s
such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he brake system is a fortuitous even and that,
has duly proved. The medical fees totaling therefore, they are exempt from any liability.
P400,000 were duly substantiated by official Is this contention tenable? Explain. (2002 Bar)
receipts, Article 2200 of the Civil Code also
provides that indemnification for damages A: No. Mechanical defects of a motor vehicle do
shall comprehend not only the value of the not constitute fortuitous event, since the
loss suffered, but also that of the profits presence of such defects would have been
which the obligee failed to obtain. The rate readily detected by diligent maintenance check.
of her salary was established at P50,000 per The failure to maintain the vehicle in safe running
month; thus, her inability to report for work condition constitutes negligence.
and earn salary for two months entitled her
to a total of P100,000. Mrs. A, therefore, can Q: Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then the
claim her expenses for medical fees and two Commissioner of Internal Revenue while
months’ worth of salary the total of which is Fortune Tobacco Corporation is an entity
P500.000. engaged in the manufacture of different
brands of cigarettes, among which are
c. No, Mrs. A cannot claim damages on behalf "Champion," "Hope," and "More" cigarettes.
of her unborn baby. Birth determines
personality. The Court has held that an Fortune filed a complaint against Vinzons-
action for pecuniary damages on account of Chato to recover damages for the alleged
personal injury or death pertains primarily violation of its constitutional rights arising
to the one injured, and if no action for such from Vinzons-Chato’s issuance of Revenue
damages could be instituted on behalf of the Memorandum Circular No. 37-934 (which
unborn child on account of the injuries it re- classified Fortune cigarettes as locally
received, no such right of action could manufactured with foreign brands and
derivatively accrue to its parents or heirs. thereby imposed higher taxes), which the
Supreme Court later declared invalid.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to dismiss
Yes, Mrs. A can claim damages on behalf of her arguing that she cannot be held liable for
unborn baby. The Court has held that a damages for acts she performed while in the
conceived child, although yet unborn, is given by discharge of her duties as BIR Commissioner.
law provisional personality of its own for all Is she correct? Explain. (2012 Bar)
purposes favorable to it, as explicitly provided in
Art. 40 of the New Civil Code, which includes A: Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is not
being a recipient of donations under Art. 742 of liable for acts performed in the discharge of his
the New Civil Code, as well as support. A claim duties. The exceptions are when he acted with
for damages in favor of the unborn should also malice, bad faith, or gross negligence in the
prosper. performance of his duty, or when his act is in
violation of the constitutionally guaranteed
d. Mrs. A must prove the following: (1) that rights and liberties of a person under Art. 32.
she suffered physical injuries; (2) that Mr.
X committed a culpable act or omission; (3) The public officer is not automatically
that the wrongful act or omission of Mr. X is considered to have violated the rights or
the proximate cause of the damages she liberties of a person simply because the rule the
sustained; and (4) that X’s act or omission public officer issued was declared invalid by the
is either a criminal offense resulting to Court. The complainant must still allege and
physical injuries or a quasi-delict causing prove the particular injury or prejudice he has
physical injuries. (Mendoza v. Gomez, G.R. suffered from the violation of his constitutional
No. 160110. June 18, 2014) right by the issuance of the invalidated rule.
CLASSIFICATION OF TORTS (2002, 2004,
2006, 2012 BAR) The problem does not state any fact from which
any malice, bad faith or gross negligence on the

133
 CIVIL LAW
part of Vinzons-Chato may be inferred, or the employee causes damage due to his own
particular injury or prejudice the complainant negligence while performing his own duties,
may have suffered as a result of the violation of there arises the juris tantum presumption that
his constitutional rights. Hence, she cannot be the employer is negligent, rebuttable only by
held liable. The facts presented are similar to the proof of observance of the diligence of a good
facts of the case of Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune, (G.R. father of a family. (Metro Manila Transit v. CA,
No. 141309, December 23, 2008). G.R. No. 104408, June 21, 1993;Delsan
Transport Lines v. C&A Construction, G.R. No.
THE TORTFEASOR (1991, 1992, 1996, 1997, 156034, October 1, 2003) Likewise, if the driver is
1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, charged and convicted in a criminal case for
2010, 2014, 2015 BAR) criminal negligence, BT is subsidiarily liable for
the damages arising from the criminal act.
Q: Tony bought a Ford Expedition from a car
dealer in Muntinlupa City. As payment, Tony Q: Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-
issued a check drawn against his current Car Co. at the Mactan International Airport.
account with Premium Bank. Since he has a No sooner had he driven the car outside the
good reputation, the car dealer allowed him airport when, due to his negligence, he
to immediately drive home the vehicle merely bumped an FX taxi owned and driven by
on his assurance that his check is sufficiently Victor, causing damage to the latter in the
funded. When the car dealer deposited the amount of P100,000.00. Victor filed an action
check, it was dishonored on the ground of for damages against both Silvestre and Avis,
"Account Closed." After an investigation, it based on quasi-delict. Avis filed a motion to
was found that an employee of the bank dismiss the complaint against it on the
misplaced Tony's account ledger. Thus, the ground of failure to state a cause of action.
bank erroneously assumed that his account Resolve the motion. (2000 Bar)
no longer exists. Later it turned out that
Tony's account has more than sufficient A: The motion to dismiss should be granted,
funds to cover the check. The dealer AVIS is not the employer of Silvestre; hence,
however, immediately filed an action for there is no right of action against AVIS under Art.
recovery of possession of the vehicle against 2180. Not being the employer, AVIS has no duty
Tony for which he was terribly humiliated to supervise Silvestre. Neither has AVIS the duty
and embarrassed. Does Tony have a cause of to observe due diligence in the selection of its
action against Premium Bank? Explain. (2006 customers. Besides, it was given in the problem
Bar) that the cause of the accident was the negligence
of Silvestre.
A: Yes, Tony may file an action against Premium
Bank for damages under Art. 2176. Even if there Q: Mabuhay Elementary School organized a
exists a contractual relationship between Tony field trip for its Grade VI students in Fort
and Premium Bank, an action for quasi-delict Santiago, Manila Zoo, and Star City. To be
may nonetheless prosper. The Supreme Court able to join, the parents of the students had
has consistently ruled that the act that breaks to sign a piece of paper that reads as follows:
the contract may also be a tort. There is a
fiduciary relationship between the bank and the "I allow my child (name of student), Grade –
depositor, imposing utmost diligence in Section, to join the school’s field trip on
managing the accounts of the depositor. The February 14, 2014.
dishonor of the check adversely affected the I will not file any claim against the school,
credit standing of Tony, hence, he is entitled to administrator or teacher in case something
damages. (Singson v. BPI, G.R. No. L-24932, June happens to my child during the trip."
27, 1968; American Express International, Inc. v.
IAC, G.R. No. 72383, November 9, 1988; Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay
Consolidated Bankand Trust v. CA, G.R.No.L- Elementary School was bitten by a snake
70766 November 9,1998) while the group was touring Manila Zoo. The
parents of Joey sued the school for damages.
Q: OJ was employed as professional driver of The school, as a defense, presented the
MM Transit bus owned by Mr. BT. In the waiver signed by Joey’s parents.
course of his work, OJ hit a pedestrian who
was seriously injured and later died in the Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the
hospital as a result of the accident. The school? Why? (2014 Bar)
victim’s heirs sued the driver and the owner of
the bus for damages. Is there a presumption A: No, there was no valid waiver of the right to
in this case that Mr. BT, the owner, had been sue the school. A waiver to be valid must have
negligent? If so, is the presumption absolute three requisites: 1) existence of the right; 2)
or not? Explain. (2004 Bar) legal capacity of the person waiving the right
and 3) the waiver must not be contrary to law,
A: Yes, there is a presumption of negligence on morals, good customs, public order or public
the part of the employer. However, such policy or prejudicial to a third person with a
presumption is rebuttable. The liability of the right recognized by law. In the case presented,
employer shall cease when they prove that they the waiver may be considered contrary to public
observed the diligence of a good father of a policy as it exonerates the school from liability
family to prevent damage. (Art. 2180) When the for future negligence. The waiver in effect allows

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 134 B A R O P E R A T I O N S

 QUAMTO (1987-2019)
the school to not exercise even ordinary institute a civil action for damages against
diligence. both taxicab owners before he can file a
civil action for damages against them?
Q: Arturo sold his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Why? (1992, 1997, 2003 Bar)
Million. Benjamin took the vehicle but did
not register the sale with the Land A:
Transportation Office. He allowed his son 1. It depends. If the civil action is based on a
Carlos, a minor who did not have a driver's quasi-delict the taxicab owners may raise
license, to drive the car to buy pan de sal in a the defense of diligence of a good father of a
bakery. On the way, Carlos driving in a family in the selection and supervision of
reckless manner, sideswiped Dennis, then the driver; if the action against is based on
riding a bicycle. As a result, he suffered culpa contractual or civil liability arising
serious physical injuries. Dennis filed a from a crime, they cannot raise the
criminal complaint against Carlos for defense.
reckless imprudence resulting in serious
2. It depends. If the separate civil action is to
physical injuries.
recover damages arising from the criminal
1. Can Dennis file an independent civil act, reservation is necessary. If the civil
action against Carlos and his father action against the taxicab owners is based
Benjamin for damages based on quasi- on culpa contractual, or on quasi-delict,
delict? Explain. there is no need for reservation.
2. Assuming Dennis' action is tenable, can
Benjamin raise the defense that he is Q: Primo owns a pet iguana which he keeps in
not liable because the vehicle is not a man-made pond enclosed by a fence situated
registered in his name? Explain.(2006 in his residential lot. A typhoon knocked down
BAR) the fence of the pond and the iguana crawled
out of the gate of Primo’s residence. N, a
A: neighbor who was passing by, started throwing
1. Yes, Dennis can file an independent civil stones at the iguana, drawing the iguana to
action against Carlos and his father for move toward him. N panicked and ran but
damages based on quasi-delict there being tripped on something and suffered a broken
an act or omission causing damage to leg. Is anyone liable for N’s injuries? Explain.
another without contractual obligation. (2010 Bar)
Under Sec. 1 of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules
on Criminal Procedure, what is deemed A: No one is liable. The possessor of an animal or
instituted with the criminal action is only whoever may make use of the same is responsible
the action to recover civil liability arising for the damage it may cause, although it may
from the act or omission punished by law. escape or be lost. This responsibility shall cease
An action based on quasi-delict is no longer only in case the damage should come from force
deemed instituted and may be filed majeure or from the fault of the person who has
separately. (Sec. 3, Rule 111, Rules of suffered damage. (Art. 2183)
Criminal Procedure)
Q: A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran
2. No, Benjamin cannot raise the defense that over a boy who died instantly. A criminal case
the vehicle is not registered in his name. for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide
His liability, vicarious in character, is based was filed against the driver. He was convicted
on Art. 2180 because he is the father of a and was ordered to pay P2 Million in actual
minor who caused damage due to and moral damages to the parents of the boy
negligence. While the suit will prosper who was an honor student and had a bright
against the registered owner, it is the actual future. Without even trying to find out if the
owner of the private vehicle who is driver had assets or means to pay the award
ultimately liable. (See Duavit v. CA, G.R. No. L- of damages, the parents of the boy filed a civil
29759, May 18, 1989) The purpose of car action against the bus company to make it
registration is to reduce difficulty in directly liable for the damages.
identifying the party liable in case of
1. Will their action prosper?
accidents. (Villanueva v. Domingo, G.R. No.
2. If the parents of the boy do not wish to
144274, September14, 2004).
file a separate civil action against the bus

company, can they still make the bus
Q: As a result of a collision between the
company liable if the driver cannot' pay the
taxicab owned by A and another taxicab
award for damages? If so, what is the nature
owned by B, X, a passenger of the first
of the employer's liability and how may civil
taxicab, was seriously injured. X later filed a
damages be satisfied? (2015 Bar)
criminal action against both drivers.


A:
1. May both taxicab owners raise the
1. Yes, the action will prosper. The liability of
defense of due diligence in the selection
the employer in this case may be based on
and supervision of their drivers to be
absolved from liability for damages to X? quasi-delict and is included within the
Reason. coverage of independent civil action. It is
2. Is it necessary for X to reserve his right to not necessary to enforce the civil liability
based on culpa aquiliana that the driver or

135
 CIVIL LAW
employee be proven to be insolvent since latter was not an employee as held by
the liability of the employer for the quasi- Supreme Court in Filamer Christian Institute
delicts committed by their employees is v. CA, (G.R. No. 75112, August 17, 1991). Peter
direct and primary subject to the defense of belongs to a special category of students
due diligence on their part. (Art. 2176; Art. who render service to the school in exchange
2180) for free tuition fees.
2. Yes, the parents of the boy can enforce the 2. I would maintain the same answer because
subsidiary liability of the employer in the the incident did not occur while the employee
criminal case against the driver. The was in the performance of his duty as such
conviction of the driver is a condition sine employee. The incident occurred at
qua non for the subsidiary liability of the nighttime, and in any case, there was no
employer to attach. Proof must be shown indication in the problem that he was
that the driver is insolvent. (Art. 103, RPC) performing his duties as a driver.
3. In the case of Peter, if he were to be
Q: A Gallant driven by John and owned by Art, considered as employee, the exercise of due
and a Corolla driven by its owner, Gina, diligence in the selection and supervision of
collided somewhere along Adriatico Street. peter would not be a material issue since the
As a result of the accident, Gina had a conviction of Peter would result in a
concussion. Subsequently, Gina brought an subsidiary liability where the defense would
action for damages against John and Art. not be available by the employer.
There is no doubt that the collision is due to
John's negligence. Can Art, who was in the In the case of Paul, since the basis of
vehicle at the time of the accident, be held subsidiary liability is the pater familias rule
solidarily liable with his driver, John? (1996, under Art. 2180, the defense of selection and
1998, 2002 Bar) supervision of the employee would be a
valid defense.
A: Yes. Art may be held solidary liable with John,
if it was proven that the former could have Q: After working overtime up to midnight,
prevented the misfortune with the use of due Alberto, an executive of an insurance
diligence. In motor mishaps, the owner is company drove a company vehicle to a
solidary liable with his driver, if the former, who favorite Videoke bar where he had some
was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of due drinks and sang some songs with friends to
diligence, prevented the misfortune. (Art. 2184) "unwind". At 2:00 a.m., he drove home, but in
doing so, he bumped a tricycle, resulting in
Q: Romano was bumped by a minivan owned the death of its driver. May the insurance
by the Solomon School of Practical Arts company be held liable for the negligent act
(SSPA). The minivan was driven by Peter, a of Alberto? Why? (2001 BAR)
student assistant whose assignment was to
clean the school passageways daily one hour A: The insurance company is not liable because
before and one hour after regular classes, in when the accident occurred, Alberto was not
exchange for free tuition. Peter was able to acting within the assigned tasks of his
drive the school vehicle after persuading the employment. It is true that under Art. 2180 (par.
regular driver, Paul, to turn over the wheel to 5), employers are liable for damages caused by
him (Peter). Romano suffered serious their employees who were acting within the
physical injuries. The accident happened at scope of their assigned tasks. However, the mere
night when only one headlight of the vehicle fact that Alberto was using a service vehicle of the
was functioning, and Peter only had a student employer at the time of the injurious accident
driver's permit. As a consequence, Peter was does not necessarily mean that he was operating
convicted in the criminal case. Thereafter, the vehicle within the scope of his employment.
Romano sued for damages against Peter and In Castilex Industrial Corp. v. Vasquez Jr (G.R. No.
SSPA.
132266, December 21, 1999) the Supreme Court

held that notwithstanding the fact that the
1. Will the action for damages against
employee did some overtime work for the
Peter and SSPA prosper?
company, the former was, nevertheless, engaged
2. Will your answer be the same if, Paul, the
in his own affairs or carrying out a personal
regular driver, was impleaded as party
purpose when he went to a restaurant at 2:00
defendant for allowing Peter to drive the
a.m. after coming out from work. The time of the
minivan without a regular driver's
accident (also 2:00 a. m.) was outside normal
license?
3. Is the exercise of due diligence in the working hours.
selection and supervision of Peter and
Paul a material issue to be resolved in Q: Under the law on quasi-delict, aside from
this case? (1991 Bar) the persons who caused injury to persons,
who else are liable under the following
A: circumstances:
1. Yes. It will prosper (Art. 2180) because at
the time he drove the vehicle, he was not 1. When a 7-year-old boy injures his
playmate while playing with his father's
performing his assigned tasks as provided
rifle. Explain.
for by Art. 2180. With respect to SSPA, it is
2. When a domestic helper, while haggling
not liable for the acts of Peter because the
for a lower price with a fish vendor in the

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 136 B A R O P E R A T I O N S

 QUAMTO (1987-2019)
course of buying foodstuffs for her A:
employer's family, slaps the fish vendor, 1. At the time the incident occurred in May
causing her to fall and sustain injuries. 1989, Rozanno was still a minor. Being a
Explain. minor, Art. 218, (FC) applies. Pursuant to
3. A carpenter in a construction company Art. 218, the school, its administrators and
accidentally hits the right foot of his co- teachers shall be liable for the acts of minor
worker with a hammer. Explain. Rozanno because of the special parental
4. A 15-year-old high school student stabs authority and responsibility that they
his classmate who is his rival for a girl exercise over him. The authority applies to
while they were going out of the all authorized activities, whether inside or
classroom after their last class. Explain. outside the premises of the school, entity or
5. What defense, if any, is available to institution. The field trip on which occasion
them? (2005 Bar) Rozanno drove the car, was an authorized
activity, and, thus, covered by the provision.
A: Furthermore, the parents of Rozanno are
1. The parents of the 7-year-old boy who subsidiarily liable pursuant to Art. 219 (FC),
caused injury to his playmate are liable and principally liable under Art. 221 (FC), if
under Art. 219, FC, in relation to Art. 2180 of they are negligent.
the Civil Code since they exercise parental
authority over the person of the boy. 2. With respect to the damages caused to the
(Tamargo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85044, jeepney, only Rozanno should be held liable
June 3, 1992; Elcano v. Hill, G.R. No. L-24803,
because his negligence or tortuous act was
May 26, 1977)
the sole, proximate and immediate cause
2. Employer of the domestic helper who thereof.
slapped a fish vendor. Under Art. 2180, par. 5,
"employers shall be liable for the damages
3. Since Rozanno was 16 years old in 1989, if
caused by their employees and household
the incident happened sometime in the
helpers acting within the scope of their
middle of 1994, Rozanno have been 21 years
assigned tasks, even though the former are
old at the time. Hence, he was already of
not engaged in any business or industry."
legal age. The law reducing the age of
3. The owner of the construction company. Art.
majority to 18 years took effect in December
2180, par. 4 states that "the owners and
1989.
managers of an establishment or enterprise

are likewise responsible for damages caused
Being of legal age, Arts. 218, 219, and 221
by their employees in the service of the
(FC), are no longer applicable. In such case,
branches in which the latter are employed
only Rozanno will be personally responsible
or on the occasion of their functions."
for all the consequences of his act unless his
4. The school, teacher and administrator as
school or his parents were themselves also
they exercise special parental authority.
negligent and such negligence contributed to
(Art. 2180, par. 7 of the Civil Code in relation
the happening of the incident. In that event,
to Art. 218 and Art. 219, FC)
the school or his parents are not liable under
5. The defense that might be available to them
Art. 218, 218 or 221 (FC), but will be liable
is the observance of a good father of the
under general provision on the Civil Code on
family to prevent the damage. (Last par.,
quasi-delict.
Art. 2180)


Q: On May 5, 1989, 16-year-old Rozanno, who THE CONCEPTS AND DOCTRINES OF RES
was issued a student permit, drove to school IPSA LOQUITUR, LAST CLEAR CHANCE,
a car, a gift from his parents. On even date, as PROXIMATE CAUSE, DAMNUM ABSQUE
his class was scheduled to go on a field trip, INJURIA, PRESUMPTION OF NEGLIGENCE,
his teacher requested him to accommodate VICARIOUS LIABILITY (1990, 2002, 2007,
in his car, as he did, four (4) of his classmates 2016 BAR)
because the van rented by the school was too Q: Dr. Jack, a surgeon, holds clinic at the St.
crowded. On the way to a museum which the Vincent's Hospital and pays rent to the
students were scheduled to visit, Rozanno hospital. The fees of Dr. Jack are paid directly
made a wrong maneuver, causing a collision to him by the patient or through the cashier
with a jeepney. One of his classmates died. He of the hospital. The hospital publicly displays
and the three (3) others were badly injured. in the lobby the names and specializations of
the doctors associated or accredited by it,
1. Who is liable for the death of Rozanno’s including that of Dr. Jack. Marta engaged the
classmate and the injuries suffered by services of Dr. Jack because of recurring
Rozanno and his 3 other classmates? stomach pain. It was diagnosed that she is
Explain. suffering from cancer and had to be operated
2. How about the damage to the jeepney? on. Before the operation, she was asked to
Explain. sign a "consent for hospital care," which
3. Under the same facts, except the date of reads:
occurrence of the incident, this time in
mid-1994, what would be your answer? "Permission is hereby given to the medical,
Explain. (2010 Bar) nursing and laboratory staff of the St.
Vincent's Hospital to perform such

137
 CIVIL LAW
procedures and to administer such
medications and treatments as may be A: A CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST is a trust not
deemed necessary or advisable by the created by any word or phrase, either expressly
physicians of this hospital for and during the or impliedly, evincing a direct intention to create
confinement." a trust, but is one that arises in order to satisfy
the demands of justice. It does not come about by
After the surgery, the attending nurses agreement or intention but mainly operation of
reported that two (2) sponges were missing. law and construed as a trust against one who, by
Later, Marta died due to complications fraud, duress or abuse of confidence, obtains or
brought about by the sponges that were left holds the legal right to property which he ought
in her stomach. The husband of Marta sued not, in equity and good conscience to hold. (Heirs
the hospital and Dr. Jack for damages arising of Lorenzo Yap v. CA, G.R. No. 133047, August 17,
from negligence in the medical procedure. 1990)
The hospital raised the defense that Dr. Jack
is not its employee as it did not hire Dr. Jack The following are examples of constructive
nor pay him any salary or compensation. It trust:
has absolutely no control over the medical
services and treatment being provided by Dr. 1. Art. 1455 which provides: “If property is
Jack. Dr. Jack even signed an agreement that acquired through mistake or fraud, the
he holds the hospital free and harmless from person obtaining it is, by force of law
any liability arising from his medical practice considered a trustee of an implied trust for
in the hospital. the benefit of the person for whom the
property comes.
Is St. Vincent's Hospital liable for the 2. Art. 1451 which provides: “When land
negligence of Dr. Jack? Explain your answer. passes by succession through any person
(2016 Bar) and he causes the legal title to be put in the
name of another, a trust is established by
A: Yes, St. Vincent’s Hospital is liable. In the case implication of law for the benefit of the true
of Professional Services v. Agana (513 SCRA 478 owner.”
[2007]), the Supreme Court held that the 3. Art. 1454 which provides: “If an absolute
hospital is liable to the Aganas, not under the conveyance of property is made in order to
principle of respondent superior for lack of secure the performance of an obligation of
evidence of an employer-employee relationship the grantor toward the grantee, a trust by
with Dr. Ampil but under the principle of virtue of law is established. If the
ostensible agency for the negligence of Dr. fulfillment of the obligation is offered by
Ampil, pro hac vice, under the principle of the grantee when it becomes due, he may
corporate negligence for its failure to perform its demand the reconveyance of the property
duties as a hospital. to him.”
4. Art. 1455 which provides: “When any
While it is true that there was insufficient trustee, guardian or any person holding a
evidence that St. Vincent’s Hospital exercised the fiduciary relationship uses trust funds for
power of control or wielded such power over the the purchase of property and causes
means and the details of the specific process by conveyance to be made to him or to third
which Dr. Jack applied his skills in Maria’s person, a trust us established by operation
treatment, there is ample evidence that St. of law in favor of the person to whom the
Vincent’s Hospital held out to the patient, Marta, funds belong.”
that Dr. Jack was its agent (principle of ostensible The DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE states
agency). The two factor that determine apparent that where the plaintiff was guilty of prior or
authority are present: (1) the hospital’s implied antecedent negligence, but the defendant, who
manifestation to the patient which led the latter had the ultimate opportunity to avoid the
to conclude that the doctor was the hospital’s impending harm failed to do so, it is the
agent; and (2) the patient’s reliance upon the defendant who is liable for all the consequences
conduct of the hospital and the doctor, consisted of the accident notwithstanding the prior
with ordinary care and prudence. negligence of the plaintiff. An example is where a
person was riding a pony on a bridge and
The corporate negligence ascribed to St. improperly pulled the pony to the wrong side
Vincent’s Hospital is different from the medical when he saw a car coming. The driver of the car
negligence attributed to Dr. Jack. The duties of the did not stop or change direction, and nearly hit
hospital are distinct from those of the doctor- the horse, and, the frightened animal jumped to
consultant practicing within its premises in its death. The driver of the car is guilty of
relation to the patient; hence, the failure of St. negligence because he had a fair opportunity to
Vincent’s Hospital to fulfill its duties as a avoid the accident and failed to avail himself of
hospital corporation gave rise to a direct liability that opportunity. He is liable under the doctrine
to Marta distinct from that of Dr. Jack. of last clear chance. (Picart v. Smith, G.R. No. L-
12219, March 15, 1918)
Q: Explain the following concepts and
doctrines and give an example of each: Q: Mr. and Mrs. R own a burned-out
concept of trust de son tort (constructive building, the firewall of which collapsed and
trust) and doctrine of discovered peril (last destroyed the shop occupied by the family of
clear chance). (2007 Bar) Mr and Mrs S, which resulted in injuries to

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 138 B A R O P E R A T I O N S

 QUAMTO (1987-2019)
said couple and the death of their daughter. when it upgraded DT and MT, over their
Mr and Mrs S had been warned by Mr & Mrs R objections, to First Class because they had
to vacate the shop in view of its proximity to contracted for Business Class passage. However,
the weakened wall but the former failed to although there is a breach of contract, DT and MT
do so. Mr. & Mrs. S filed against Mr and Mrs R are entitled to actual damages only for such
an action for recovery of damages the former pecuniary losses suffered by them as a result of
suffered as a result of the collapse of the such breach. There seems to be no showing that
firewall. In defense, Mr and Mrs R rely on the they incurred such pecuniary loss. There is no
doctrine of last clear chance alleging that Mr showing that the pain in DT's arm and wrist
and Mrs S had the last clear chance to avoid resulted directly from the carrier's acts
the accident if only they heeded the former’s complained of. Hence, they are not entitled to
warning to vacate the shop, and therefore Mr actual damages. Moreover, DT could have
and Mrs R’s prior negligence should be avoided the alleged injury by requesting the
disregarded. If you were the judge, how would airline staff to do the luggage transfer as a
you decide the case? State your reasons. (1990 matter of duty on their part. There is also no
Bar) basis to award moral damages for such breach of
contract because the facts of the problem do not
A: I would decide in favor of Mr.& Mrs. S. The
show bad faith or fraud on the part of the airline.
proprietor of a building or structure is
(Cathay Pacific v. Vazquez, G.R. No. 150843,
responsible for the damages resulting from its
March 14, 2003) However, they may recover
total or partial collapse, if it should be due to the
moral damages if the cause of action is based on
lack of necessary repairs. (Art. 2190) As regards
Art. 21 for the humiliation and embarrassment
the defense of “last clear chance,” the same is not
they felt when the stewardess threatened to
tenable because according to the SC the doctrine
offload them if they did not avail of the upgrade.
of last clear chance is not applicable to instances

covered by Art 2190 of the Civil Code. (De Roy v.
Q: Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent
CA, G.R. L-80718, January 29, 1988) The role of
citizens of the country and are frequent
the common law "last clear chance" doctrine in
travelers abroad. In 1996, they booked
relation to Art. 2179 is merely to mitigate
round-trip business class tickets for the
damages within the context of contributory
Manila-Hong Kong-Manila route of the Pinoy
negligence. (Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. Airlines, where they are holders of Gold
No. L-65295, March 10, 1987) Mabalos Class Frequent Flier cards. On their
return flight, Pinoy Airlines upgraded their
Q: Explain the concept of vicarious liability tickets to first class without their consent
in quasi-delicts. (2002 Bar) and, in spite of their protestations to be
A: The doctrine of VICARIOUS LIABILITY is that allowed to remain in the business class so that
which renders a person liable for the negligence they could be with their friends, they were
of others for whose acts or omission the law told that the business class was already fully
makes him responsible on the theory that they booked, and that they were given priority in
are under his control and supervision. upgrading because they are elite
members/holders of Gold Mabalos Class
LEGAL INJURY (2004, 2005 BAR) cards. Since they were embarrassed at the
discussions with the flight attendants, they
Q: DT and MT were prominent members of were forced to take the flight at the first-class
the frequent travelers’ club of FX Airlines. In section apart from their friends who were in
Hongkong, the couple were assigned seats in the business class. Upon their return to
Business Class for which they had bought Manila, they demanded a written apology
tickets. On checking in, however, they were from Pinoy Airlines. When it went unheeded,
told they were upgraded by computer to First the couple sued Pinoy Airlines for breach of
Class for the flight to Manila because the contract claiming moral and exemplary
Business Section was overbooked. damages, as well as attorney's fees. Will the
action prosper? Give reasons. (2004, 2005 Bar)
Both refused to transfer despite better seats,
food, beverage and other services in First A: Yes, the action will prosper. Art. 2201entitles
Class. They said they had guests in Business the person to recover damages which may be
Class they should attend to. They felt attributed to non-performance of an obligation.
humiliated, embarrassed and vexed, however, In Alitalia Airways v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No.
when the stewardess allegedly threatened to 77011, July 24, 1990), when an airline issues
offload them if they did not avail of the ticket to a passenger confirmed on a particular
upgrade. Thus, they gave in, but during the flight, a contract of carriage arises and the
transfer of luggage DT suffered pain in his passenger expects that he would fly on that day.
arm and wrist. After arrival in Manila, they When the airline deliberately overbooked, it took
demanded an apology from FX’s management the risk of having to deprive some passengers of
as well as indemnity payment. When none their seat in case all of them would show up. For
was forthcoming, they sued the airline for a the indignity and inconvenience of being refused
million pesos in damages. Is the airline liable the confirmed seat, said passenger is entitled to
for actual and moral damages? Why or why moral damages. In the given problem, spouses
not? Explain briefly. (2004 Bar) Almeda had a booked roundtrip business class
ticket with Pinoy Airlines. When their tickets
A: FX Airlines committed breach of contract were upgraded to first class without their

139
 CIVIL LAW
consent, Pinoy Airlines breached the contract. As it. (Art. 2184) In such case, his liability is
ruled in Zulueta v. Pan American (G.R. No. L- solidary with his driver.
28589, January 8, 1973), in case of overbooking,
airline is in bad faith. Therefore, spouses Almeda ACTUAL AND COMPENSATORY DAMAGES
are entitled to damages. (1991, 2002, 2014, 2016 BAR)

Q: Peter, a resident of Cebu City, sent through
Book II – Damages Reliable Pera Padala (RPP) the amount of
Articles 2195 – 2235 (Civil Code) P20,000.00 to his daughter, Paula, for the
payment of her tuition fee. Paula went to an
RPP branch but was informed that there was
no money remitted to her name. Peter
GENERAL PROVISIONS (1994, 2009) inquired from RPP and was informed that
there was a computer glitch and the money
Q: Johnny Maton's conviction for homicide was credited to another person. Peter and
was affirmed by the Court of Appeals and in Paula sued RPP for actual damages, moral
addition although the prosecution had not damages and exemplary damages. The trial
appealed at all. The appellate court court ruled that there was no proof of
increased the indemnity for death from pecuniary loss to the plaintiffs but awarded
P30,000.00 to P50,000.00. On his appeal to moral damages of P20,000.00 and exemplary
the Supreme Court, among the other things damages of P5,000.00. On appeal, RPP
Johnny Maton brought to the high court's questioned the award of moral and
attention, was the increase of indemnity exemplary damages. Is the trial court correct
imposed by the Court of Appeals despite the in awarding moral and exemplary damages?
clear fact that the People had not appealed Explain. (2016 Bar)
from the appellate court’s judgment. Is Johnny
Maton correct? (1994 Bar) A: No, the trial court is not correct in awarding
moral and exemplary damages. The damages in
A: In Abejam v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme this case are prayed for based on the breach of
Court said that even if the issue of damages were contract committed by RPP in failing to deliver
not raised by the appellant in the Court of the sum of money to Paula. Under the provisions
Appeals but the Court of Appeals in its findings of the Civil Code, in breach of contract, moral
increased the damages, the Supreme Court will damages may be recovered when the defendant
not disturb the findings of the Court of Appeals. acted in bad faith or was guilty of gross
negligence (amounting to bad faith) or in wanton
Q: Rommel’s private car, while being driven by disregard of his contractual obligation. In the
the regular family driver, Amado, hits a same fashion, to warrant the award of exemplary
pedestrian causing the latter’s death.
damages, the wrongful act must be accomplished
Rommel is not in the car when the incident
by bad faith, and an award of damages would be
happened.
allowed only if the guilty party acted in a

wanton, fraudulent, reckless or malevolent
1. Is Rommel liable for damages to the
manner. (Art. 2232, CC)
heirs of the deceased? Explain.

2. Would your answer be the same if
Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment
Rommel was in the car at the time of the
accident? Explain. (1994, 2009 Bar) or negligence. It imports a dishonest purpose or
some moral obliquity and conscious doing of a
A: wrong, a breach of known duty through some
1. Yes, Rommel may be held liable for motive or interest or ill will that partakes of the
damages if he fails to prove that he nature of fraud. In this case, however, RPP’s
exercised the diligence of a good father of a breach was due to a computer glitch which at
family (Art. 2180, par 5) in selecting and most can be considered as negligence on its part,
supervising his family driver. The owner is but definitely does not constitute bad faith or
presumed liable unless he proves the fraud as would warrant the award of moral and
defense of diligence. If the driver was exemplary damages.
performing his assigned task when the
accident happened, Rommel shall be Q: On her third month of pregnancy,
solidarily liable with the driver. Rosemarie married to Boy. For reasons
known only to her, and without informing
Boy, went to the clinic of X, a known
In case the driver is convicted of reckless
abortionist, who for a fee, removed and
imprudence and cannot pay the civil
expelled the fetus from her womb, Boy
liability, Rommel is subsidiarily liable for
learned of the abortion six (6) months later.
the damage awarded against the driver and
Availing of that portion of Section 12 of
the defense of diligence is not available.
Article II of the 1987 Constitution which reads:

2. Yes, my answer would be the same. The State xxx shall equally protect the life of
Rommel, who was in the car, shall be liable the mother and the life of the unborn from
for damages if he could have prevented the conception, xxx which he claims confers a civil
misfortune by the use of due diligence in personality on the unborn from the moment
supervising his driver but failed to exercise of conception. Boy filed a case for damages

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 140 B A R O P E R A T I O N S

 QUAMTO (1987-2019)
against the abortionist, praying therein that (2002 Bar)
the latter be ordered to pay him: (a)
A:
P30,000.00 as indemnity for the death of the
1. There is no legal basis to Ortillo’s claim for
fetus, (b) P100, 000.00 as moral damages for
moral damages. It does not fall under the
the mental anguish and anxiety he suffered,
coverage of Art. 2219.
(c) P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, (d)
P20,000.00 as nominal damages, and (e) 2. Ortillo is entitled to attorney’s fees because
P25,000.00 as attorney's fees. Fabricato’s complaint is a case of malicious
prosecution or a clearly unfounded civil
May actual damages be also recovered? If action. (Art. 2208 [4] and [11])
so, what facts should be alleged and
proved? (1991 Bar) Q: Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an illicit
A: Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered affair with his secretary, Nanette, a 19-year-
should be substantiated and duly proved. old girl, and begot a baby girl, Rona. Nanette
sued Rodolfo for damages: actual, for
Q: If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus hospital and other medical expenses in
were to suffer an abortion following a delivering the child by caesarean section;
vehicular accident due to the gross moral, claiming that Rodolfo promised to
negligence of the bus driver, may she and her marry her, representing that he was single
husband claim damages from the bus when, in fact, he was not; and exemplary, to
company for the death of their unborn child? teach a lesson to like-minded Lotharios.
Explain. (2003, 2014 Bar)
If you were the judge, would you award all
A: No, the spouses cannot recover actual the claims of Nanette? Explain.
damages in the form of indemnity for the loss of
life of the unborn child. This is because the A: If Rodolfo's marriage could not have been
unborn child is not yet considered a person and possibly known to Nanette or there is no gross
the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of negligence on the part of Nanette, Rodolfo could
person.The mother, however may recover be held liable for moral damages.
damages for the bodily injury she suffered from
the loss of the fetus which is considered part of If there is gross negligence in a suit for quasi-
her internal organ. The parents may also delict, exemplary could be awarded.
recover damages for injuries that are inflicted
directly upon them, e.g., moral damages for Q: Rosa was leasing an apartment in the city.
mental anguish that attended the loss of the Because of the Rent Control Law, her
unborn child. Since there is gross negligence, landlord could not increase the rental as
exemplary damages can also be recovered. much as he wanted to, nor terminate her
(Geluz v. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961) lease as long as she was paying her rent. In
order to force her to leave the premises, the
MORAL DAMAGES (1996, 2002 BAR) landlord stopped making repairs on the
apartment, and caused the water and

Q: Ortillo contracts Fabricato, Inc. to supply electricity services to be disconnected. The
and install tile materials in a building he is difficulty of living without electricity and
donating to his province. Ortillo pays 50% of running water resulted in Rosa's suffering a
the contract price as per agreement. It is also nervous breakdown. She sued the landlord
agreed that the balance would be payable for actual and moral damages. Will the action
prosper? Explain. (1996 Bar)
periodically after every 10% performance

until completed. After performing about 93%
of the contract, for which it has been paid an A: Yes, based on quasi-delict under the human
additional 40% as per agreement, Fabricato, relations provisions of the New Civil Code (Arts.
Inc. did not complete the project due to its 19, 20 and 21) because the act committed by the
sudden cessation of operations. Instead, lessor is contrary to morals. Moral damages are
Fabricato, Inc. demands payment of the last recoverable under Art. 2219 (10) in relation to
10% of the contract despite its non- Art. 21. Although the action is based on quasi-
completion of the project. Ortillo refuses to delict and not on contract, actual damages may
pay, invoking the stipulation that payment of be recovered if the lessee is able to prove the
the last amount 10% shall be upon losses and expenses she suffered.
completion. Fabricato, Inc. brings suit for the Alternative Answers:
entire 10%. Plus damages, Ortillo counters a) Yes, based on breach of contract. The lessor
with claims for (a) moral damages for has the obligation to undertake repairs to make
Fabricato, Inc.’s unfounded suit which has the apartment habitable and to maintain the
damaged his reputation as a philanthropist lessee in the peaceful and adequate enjoyment
and respect businessman in his community, of the lease for the entire duration of the
and (b) attorney’s fees. contract (Article 1654. NCC). Since there was
willful breach of contract by the lessor, the
a. Does Ortillo have a legal basis for his lessee is entitled to moral damages under
claim for moral damages? Article 3220, NCC. She is also entitled to
b. How about his claim for attorney’s fees, actual damages, e. g. loss of income, medical
having hired a lawyer to defend him? expenses, etc., which she can prove at the trial.

141
 CIVIL LAW

b) Yes, based on contract and/or on tort.
The lessor willfully breached his obligations
under Article 1654. NCC, hence, he is liable for
breach of contract. For such breach, the lessee
may recover moral damages under Art. 2220 of
the NCC, and actual damages that she may have
suffered on account thereof. And since the
conduct of the lessor was contrary to morals, he
may also be held liable for quasi- delict. The
lessee may recover moral damages under Article
2219 (10) in relation to Article 21, and all actual
damages which she may have suffered by reason
of such conduct under Articles 9, 20 and 21.

c) Yes, the action should prosper for both actual
and moral damages. In fact, even exemplary
damages and attorney’s fees can be claimed by
Rosa, on the authority of Magbanua vs. IAC (137
SCRA 328), considering that, as given, the
lessor’s willful and illegal act of disconnecting
the water and electric services resulted in Rosa’s
suffering a nervous breakdown. Art. 20 NCC and
Art, 21, NCC authorize the award of damages for
such willful and illegal conduct.

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N T O T O M A S U S T
2 0 2 1 A C A D E M I C S C O M M I T T E E 142 B A R O P E R A T I O N S