Quasi-Delict
-
Whoever
by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence,
is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no
pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called quasi-delict
and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter (Art 2176, NCC).
Tort
-
It
is a wrong independent of a contract, which arises from an act or omission of a
person which causes some injury or damage directly or indirectly to another
person.
-
It
is the ordinary French word for “wrong”.
-
It
is an offense against the individual but it may, at the same time, be a crime.
-
It
may arise out of contractual relations
Tort
vs Crime
Tort
-
It
is a private wrong or injury.
-
It
is an infringement of the private or civil rights of another, hence, pursued by
the private individual.
-
It
seeks indemnity for damage or injury sustained without seeking the imprisonment
of the tortfeasor.
-
Quantum
of evidence: Preponderance of evidence
-
Quantum
of proof: Negligence or fault should be clearly established.
-
It
is governed by the New Civil Code
Crime
-
It
is an offense against the public being a punishable act and is pursued by the
sovereign authority.
-
It
generally seeks the curtailment of the liberty or imprisonment of the offender
with possible civil liability.
-
Quantum
of evidence: Proof beyond reasonable doubt
-
It
is governed by the Revised Penal Code
Coverage
of Quasi-delict: All wrongful acts or omissions
1.
They
are not constitutive of contract.
2.
They
are not punishable as offenses
Elements
of Quasi-Delict
1.
Damage
/ Injury
2.
Negligence,
by act or omission, of which defendant, or some person for whose acts, he must
respond, was guilty
3.
Connection
of the cause and effect between such negligence and damage.
Damage
-
It
is the loss, hurt or harm which results from injury.
Damages
-
It
refers to the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered.
Fault
-
It
is condition where a person acts in a way or manner contrary to what normally
should have been done.
Negligence
-
The
fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence
which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds with the
circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place. (Art. 1173).
-
It
is the failure to observe for the protection of the interests of another
person, that degree of care, precaution and vigilance which the circumstances
justly demand, whereby such other person suffers injury.
Moral
Damages is not available in breach of contract of carriage
Exception:
1.
In
cases in which the mishap results in the death of the passenger (Art 1764 inR 2206(3))
2.
In
cases in which the carrier is guilty of fraud or bad faith (Art2220)
Test
of determining Negligence
-
Would
a prudent man, in the position of the person to whom negligence is attributed,
foresee harm to the person injured as a reasonable consequence of the course
about to be pursued? If so, the law imposed a duty on the actor to refrain from
the course or take precaution against its mischievous results, and the failure
to do so constitutes negligence. (Picart vs Smith)
FGU
Corp vs CA
Facts:
This was a two car collision. A car
owned by Soriano and the other car owned by rent-a-car company (FILCAR) and
driven by its lessee (Dahl-Jensen).
Issue:
WON FILCAR is liable for the fault
or negligence of the car lessee in driving the rented vehicle.
Ruling:
No.
Petitioner failed to prove the
existence of negligence on the part of FILCAR. Respondent FILCAR being engaged
in a rent-a-car business was only the owner of the car leased to Dahl-Jensen.
As such, there was no vinculum juris between them as employer and employee.
No
pre-existing contract between the parties: Quasi - Delicts
Except:
when the contract was grossly violated or deliberate and malicious violation of
the contract or the breach was palpably wanton, reckless, malicious, or in bad
faith, oppressive or obscure.
Cases
where Article 2176 is not applicable
1.
When
there was a pre-existing contractual relation of employer and employee between
the parties.
2.
When
the fault or negligence is punished by law as crime.
3.
If
the action is instituted after 4 years, it is deemed prescribed.
4.
When
the injury suffered by a person is the result of a fortuitous event without
human intervention.
5.
If
there is no damage or injury caused to another party.
6.
When
there is no breach of contract nor proof that an airline acted in wanton,
fraudulent or malevolent manner, there is no basis for the award of any form of
damages.
Quasi-delict
vs Delict
|
Basis
|
Quasi-delict (Culpa-aquillana)
|
Delict or crime
|
|
Legal basis of liability
|
Fault or negligence
|
Law
|
|
Criminal intent
|
Not necessary
|
Essential
|
|
Nature of right violated
|
Private right; against private individual
|
Public right; against the State
|
|
Liability for damages
|
Every quasi-delict
|
Some crimes
|
|
Proofs needed
|
Preponderance of evidence
|
Proof beyond reasonable doubt
|
|
Sanction or penalty
|
Reparation or indemnification of the injury or
damage
|
Either imprisonment, fine or both
|
Culpa-aquillana
vs culpa-contractual
|
Basis
|
Culpa-aquillana
|
Culpa-contractual
|
|
Nature of negligence
|
Direct, substantive and independent
|
Merely incidental to the performance of the
contractual obligation
|
|
Defense of good father of the family
|
Complete and proper defense insofar as parents,
guardians, employers are concerned
|
Not a complete and proper defense in the selection
and supervision of employees.
|
|
Presumption of negligence
|
No presumption
|
There is presumption as long as it can be prove
that there was breach
|
Medical
Malpractice
-
It
is a particular form of negligence which consists in the failure of the
physician or surgeon to apply to his practice of medicine that the degree of
care and skill which is ordinarily employed by the profession generally, under
similar conditions, and in like surrounding circumstances.
-
Elements:
1.
Duty
2.
Breach
3.
Injury
4.
Proximate
causation
Apparent
authority/ Holding out theory/ ostensible agency/ agency by estoppels
-
Art.
1869. Agency may be express, or implied from the acts of the principal, from
his silence or lack of action, or his failure to repudiate the agency, knowing
that another person is acting on his behalf without authority.
-
It
imposes liability, not as the result of the reality of a contractual
relationship, but rather because of the actions of a principal or an employer
in somehow misleading the public into believing that the relationship or the
authority exists.
Highest
degree of diligence is required in the practice of medicine.
Medical
negligence
-
It
is a type of claim to redress a wrong committed by a medical professional that
has caused bodily harm to or the death of a patient.
Res
ipsa loquitur Doctrine
-
The
thing speaks for itself
-
When
applicable, the court is permitted to find the physician negligent upon proper
proof of injury to the patient, without the aid of expert testimony, where the
court from its fund of common knowledge can determine the proper standard of care.
-
When
appropriate, the patient must prove a nexus between the particular act or
omission complained of and the injury sustained while under the custody and
management of the defendant without need to produce expert medical testimony to
establish the standard of care.
-
Requisites
for the applicability:
1.
The
occurrence of an injury
2.
The
thing which caused the injury was under the control and management of the
defendant
3.
The
occurrence was such that in ordinary course of things, would not have happened
if those who had control or management used proper care
4.
The
absence of explanation by the defendant.
-
Presumption
of negligence on the part of the person who controls the instrument causing the
injury, if:
1.
The
accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of
someone’s negligence.
2.
It
is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant/s
3.
The
possibility of contributing conduct which would make the plaintiff responsible
is eliminated.
Captain
of the Ship Doctrine
-
The
operating surgeon is the person in complete charge of the surgery room and all
personnel connected with the operation.
Article
2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is
entirely separate and distinct from civil liability arising from negligence
under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the
same act or omission of the defendant
Modes
of enforcing civil liability due to fault or negligence.
Injured
party has the option:
1.
Criminal
action which includes civil liability (Art. 100, RPC)
2.
Independent
civil action (Quasi-delict)
Action
against the employer:
1.
Primary
liability (Art 2180, NCC)
2.
Subsidiary
liability (Art 103, RPC)
Two
separate civil liabilities arising from the same act or omission
1.
Civil
liability ex delicto (Art. 100, RPC)
2.
Independent
civil liabilities
a.
Culpa
contractual
Article
31. When the civil action is based on obligation not arising from the act or
omission complained of as a felony, such civil action may proceed independently
of the criminal proceedings and regardless of the result of the latter.
b.
Intentional
torts
Article
32.
Article
34.
c.
Culpa
Aquillana (2176)
Rules
for the recovery of civil liability arising from crime and other sources
1.
Death
of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal
liability as well as the civil liability based solely thereon.
2.
The
claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of the accused, if
the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict.
3.
Where
the civil liability survives, an action for recovery therefore may be pursued
but only by way of filing a separate civil action.
4.
The
statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed interrupted during the
pendency of the criminal case.
GR:
Judgment of acquittal does not necessarily extinguish the civil liability of
the accused
XPN:
1.
When
it declares that the facts from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist.
2.
When
it declares that the accused in not the author of the crime.
3.
When
the judgment expressly declares that the liability is only civil in nature.
4.
Where
the liability is not derived or based on the criminal act of which the accused
was acquitted.
5.
Where
the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt.
6.
Where
the civil action has prescribed.
Compulsion
of adverse party to testify (Sec 6, Rule 132, ROC)
ARTICLE
2178. The provisions of Articles 1172 to 1174 are also applicable to quasi
delict.
Article
1172.
Article
1173.
Article
1174.
ARTICLE
2179. When the plaintiff’s own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause
of his injury, he cannot recover damages. But if his negligence was only
contributory, the immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the
defendant’s lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the court
shall mitigate the damages to be awarded.
Proximate
cause
-
It
is the adequate and efficient cause as in the natural order of events, and
under the particular circumstances surrounding the case, would necessarily
produce the event.
-
It
is the cause which in natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the
injury, and without which would not have occurred.
-
Rule:
The death of the victim must be direct, natural and logical consequence of the
wound inflicted upon him by the accused. (People vs Cardenas)
-
It
is not applicable to actions involving breach of contract.
Test
to determine existence of Proximate Cause
1.
Foreseeability
test
·
Where
the particular harm was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the defendant’s
misconduct, his act or omission is the legal cause thereof.
2.
Natural
and probable consequence test
·
Where
the defendant’s liability is recognized only if the harm or injury suffered is
the natural and probable consequence of his act or omission complained of.
3.
Sine
qua non test
·
Where
the defendant’s conduct will not be considered as proximate cause of the event
if the event just the same would have occurred without it.
4.
Cause
and conditions test
·
Where
the distinction is made between the active cause of harm or injury and the
existing conditions upon which that cause operated.
·
If
the defendant has created only a passive static condition, which made the
damage possible, he is not liable.
5.
Assumption
of risk
a.
A
caretaker of a carabao got gored to death by the animal while tending it.
b.
Taking
an extension seat in the jeepney which is overloaded.
c.
Riding
on a vehicle driven by drunk.
Contributory
Negligence
-
It
is the omission of the diligence required by the circumstances by virtue of
which a person could have avoided injury to himself.
-
It
is the conduct on the part of the injured party, contributing as a legal cause
to the harm he has suffered, which falls below the standard which he is
required to conform for his own protection.
-
It
is not applicable in criminal cases, however it may mitigate civil liability of
the defendant but cannot affect his criminal liability.
-
A
child under 9 years of age is conclusively presumed incapable of contributory
negligence as a matter of law.
Doctrine
of comparative negligence
-
The
negligence of both the plaintiff and of the defendant are compared for the
purpose of reaching an equitable apportionment of their respective liabilities
for the damages caused and suffered by the plaintiff.
Doctrine
of last clear chance
-
Humanitarian
negligence doctrine
-
Doctrine
of supervening negligence
-
Exception
to the rule on contributory negligence
-
Elements:
1.
Plaintiff
is placed in danger by his own negligent act and he is unable to get out from
such situation by any means;
2.
Defendant
knows that the plaintiff is in danger and knows or should have known that the
plaintiff was unable to extricate himself therefrom; and
3.
Defendant
had the last clear chance or opportunity to avoid the accident through the
exercise of ordinary care but failed to do so, and the accident occurred as a
proximate result of such failure.
-
When
not applicable:
a.
Collapse
of building structure.
b.
When
the claim or demand of the injured passenger is the enforcement of the
carrier’s contractual obligation to bring him safely.
c.
When
the injury or accident cannot be avoided by application of all means at hand
after peril has been discovered.
Attractive
Nuisance doctrine
-
One
who maintains on his premises dangerous instrumentalities or appliances of a
character likely to attract children in play, and who fails to exercise
ordinary care to prevent children from playing therewith or resorting thereto,
is liable to a child of tender years who is injured thereby, even if the child
is technically a trespasser in the premises.
-
It
is not applicable to bodies of water, in the absence of some unusual condition
or artificial features other than mere water and its location.
Principal
defenses in actions based on negligence. (Available for defendant)
a.
Emergency
Rule
·
One
who suddenly finds himself in a place of danger, and is required to act without
time to consider the best means that may be adopted to avoid the impeding
danger, is not guilty of negligence, if he fails to adopt what subsequently and
upon reflection may have been a better method, unless the emergency in which he
finds himself is brought about by his own negligence.
b.
Assumption
of risk
·
It
presupposes an intentional exposure to a known peril.
·
Workmen’s
Compensation Act cases not covered.
c.
Contributory
negligence
·
When
the plaintiff’s own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause of his
injury, he cannot recover damages.
d.
Volenti
non fit injuria
·
It
means that to which a person assents is not esteemed in the law as injury.
·
One
is not legally injured if he has consented to the act complained of or was
willing that it shall occur.
·
This
is a specie of assumption of risk by conduct.
Rules
in Doctrine of Comparative Negligence
1.
Pure
Comparative Negligence Rule.
·
The
plaintiff can recover from the defendant regardless of the extent of the
negligence of the former.
2.
Arkansas
Comparative Negligence
·
The
plaintiff can recover if his negligence is lesser degree than that of the
defendant
·
If
50/50, he cannot recover.
Rescue
Doctrine or Humanitarian Doctrine
-
One
who has, through his negligence, endangered safety of another may be held
liable for injuries sustained by third person who attempts to save another from
injury.
ARTICLE
2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one’s
owns acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is
responsible.
The father and, in case of his death
or incapacity, the mother, are responsible for the damages caused by the minor
children who live in their company.
Guardians are liable for damages caused
by minors or incapacitated persons who are under their authority and live in
their company.
The owners and managers of an
establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages caused by
their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed
or on the occasion of their functions.
Employers shall be liable for the
damages caused by their employees and household helpers acting within the scope
of their assigned tasked, even though the former are not engaged in the business
or industry.
The State is responsible in like
manner when it acts through a special agent; but not when the damage has been
caused by the official to whom the task done properly pertains, in which case
what is provided in Article 2176 shall be applicable.
Lastly, teachers or head of
establishments of arts and trades shall be liable for damages caused by the
pupils and students or apprentices, so long as they remain in their custody.
The responsibility treated of in
this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned proved that they
observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage.
Principle
of Vicarious or imputed liability
-
The
liability for the acts of others.
Requisites
for vicarious or imputed liability of the parents
1.
The
child is below 21 y/o
2.
The
child committed a tortuous act to the damage and prejudice of another person
3.
The
child lives in the company of the parent concerned whether single or married.
Enforcement
of subsidiary liability of employer:
1.
He
is indeed the employer of the convict;
2.
That
he is engaged in some kind of industry;
3.
That
the crime was committed by the employee in the discharge of his duties;
4.
Execution
against the employee is unsatisfied.
Special
errand or roving commission rule
GR:
EE continuous in the service of his employer until he actually reaches home.
XPN:
EE has left the direct route to his work or back home and in pursuing a
personal errand of his own.
Article
218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or individual, entity or
institution engaged in child care shall have special parental authority and
responsibility over the minor child while under their supervision, instruction
or custody.
Authority and responsibility shall
apply to all authorized activities whether inside or outside the premises of
the school, entity or institution.
Article
219. Those given the authority and responsibility under the preceding Article
shall be principally and solidarily liable for damages caused by the act or
omission of the unemancipated minor. The parents, judicial guardians or the
persons exercising substitute parental authority over the said minor shall be
subsidiary liable.
The respective liabilities of those
referred to in the preceding paragraph shall not apply if it is proved that
they exercised the proper diligence required under the particular
circumstances.
All other cases not covered by this
and the preceding articles shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil
Code on quasi-delicts.
ARTICLE
2181. Whoever pays for the damage caused by his dependents or employees may
recover from the latter what he has paid or delivered in satisfaction of the
claim.
ARTICLE
2182. If the minor or insane person causing damage has no parents or guardian,
the minor or insane person shall be answerable with his own property in an
action against him where a guardian ad litem shall be appointed.
ARTICLE
2183. The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the same is
responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may escape or be
lost. This responsibility shall cease only in case the damage should come from
force majeure of from the fault of the person who has suffered damage.
Wild
beast theory
Exceptions
to the rule of liability of the possessor
1.
If
the damage was caused by force majeure.
2.
If
the damage was caused by the fault of the plaintiff or person injured.
3.
If
the damage was caused by the act of a third person.
ARTICLE
2184. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is solidarily liable with his driver,
if the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of due diligence,
prevented the misfortune. It is disputably presumed that a driver was
negligent, if had been found guilty of reckless driving or violating traffic
regulations at least twice within the next preceding two months.
If the owner was not in the motor
vehicle, the provisions of Article 2180 are applicable.
ARTICLE
2185. Unless there is proof to the contrary, it is presumed that a person
driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was
violating any traffic regulation.
ARTICLE
2186. Every owner of a motor vehicle shall file with the proper government
office a bond executed by a government-controlled corporation or office, to
answer for damages to third persons. The amount of the bond and other terms
shall be fixed by the competent official.
Motor
Vehicle Bond
ARTICLE
2187. Manufacturers and processors of food stuffs, drinks, toilet articles and
similar goods shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or
harmful substances used, although no contractual relation exists between them
and the consumers.
Plaintiff
has 4 options on remedies:
1.
Theory
of strict liability in torts;
2.
Fault
or negligence;
3.
Breach
of warranty;
4.
Crime
anchored on violation of the Food and Drugs Act (Absolute criminal liability).
ARTICLE
2188. There is prima facie presumption of negligence on the part of the
defendant if the death or injury results from his possession of dangerous
weapons or substances, such as firearms and poison, except when the possession
or use thereof is indispensable in his occupation or business.
ARTICLE
2189. Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the
death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by reason of the defective
condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works
under their control or supervision.
ARTICLE
2190. The proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the damages
resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due to lack of
necessary repairs
ARTICLE
2191. Proprietors shall also be responsible for damages caused:
(1)
By
the explosion of machinery which has not been taken care of with due diligence,
and the inflammation of explosive substances which have not been kept in a safe
place and adequate place;
(2)
By
excessive smoke, which may be harmful to person or property;
(3)
By
the falling of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if not caused by
force majeure;
(4)
By
emanations from tubes, canal, sewers or deposits of infectious matter,
constructed without precautions suitable to the place.
ARTICLE
2192. If damages referred to in the two preceding articles should be the result
of any defect in the construction mentioned in Article 1723, the third person
suffering damages may proceed only against the engineer or architect or
contractor in accordance with said article, within the period therein fixed
Prescriptive
period
-
15
years from the time the cause of action had accrued.
ARTICLE
2193. The head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof, is
responsible for the damages caused by
things thrown or falling from the same
Nature
of liability
-
Both
absolute and exclusive.
ARTICLE
2193. The responsibility of two or more person who are liable for quasi-delict
is solidary.
DAMAGES
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISONS
Damage
-
It
includes any and all damages that a human being may suffer in any and all
manifestations of his life:
Physical or material,
Moral or psychological,
Mental or spiritual,
Financial,
Economic,
Social,
Political,
Religious.
ARTICLE
2195. The provisions of this Title shall be respectively applicable to all
obligations mentioned in Article 1157.
Sources
of Obligations (Article 1157)
1.
Law
2.
Contracts
3.
Quasi
Contracts
4.
Acts
or omissions punished by law; and
5.
Quasi-delicts.
ARTICLE
2196. The rules under this Title are without prejudice to special provisions on
damages formulated elsewhere in this Code. Compensation for workmen and other
employees in case of death, injury or illness is regulated by special laws.
Rules governing damages laid down in other laws shall be observed insofar as
they are not conflict with this Code.
ER-EE
relationship
Rule
-
Moral
damages are recoverable where the dismissal of the employee was attended by bad
faith or fraud or constituted an act oppressive to labor, or was done in manner
contrary to morals, good customs or public policy
-
Exemplary
damages may be awarded if the dismissal is effected in a wanton, oppressive or
malevolent manner.
ER-EE
relations is merely incidental examples
-
Tort
-
Malicious
prosecution
-
Breach
of contract
-
When
the claimant seeks to recover a debt from a former EE
-
Claimant
seeks liquidated damages for enforcement of a prior employment contract.
ARTICLE
2197. Damages may be: (AMN TLE)
(1)
Actual
or compensatory;
(2)
Moral;
(3)
Nominal;
(4)
Temperate;
(5)
Liquidated;
or
(6)
Exemplary
or corrective.
Damages
-
It
refer to the pecuniary compensation, recompense, or satisfaction for an injury
sustained by the injured party to be paid by the person who caused the injury.
ARTICLE
2198. The principles of the general law on damages are hereby adopted insofar
as they are not inconsistent with this Code.
CHAPTER II
ACTUAL AND COMPESATORY DAMAGES
ARTICLE
2199. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, on is entitled to an
adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has
duly proved. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory
damages.
Rules
-
It
must be especially alleged and substantiated by proof.
-
Competent
proof or best evidence obtainable.
-
Absolute
certainty is not necessary.
-
No
filing fee for actual damages is required.
-
In
no instance shall the judge grant damages more than what had been proved in
court.
-
The
award for actual damages may be executed pending appeal.
GR:
Damages must be proved.
XPN:
1.
When
the penalty clause agreed is agreed upon in the contract between the parties.
(article 1226);
2.
When
the liquidated damages have been agreed upon. (Article 2226);
3.
When
the loss is presumed as when a child or spouses died as a result of the act or
omission of a person.
4.
Forfeiture
of bonds in favor of the Government for the purpose of promoting public policy
or interest.
5.
Death
caused within the contemplation of Article 2206.
ARTICLE
2200. Indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of the
loss suffered, but also the profits which the oblige falied to obtain.
Kinds
of actual or compensatory damages.
1.
Damnum
Emergens
·
The
value of actual pecuniary loss for what the claimant already possesses before
the incident which must be supported by receipts or the best evidence
available.
2.
Lucrum
cessans
·
The
expected profits which were not realized by reason of the act of the offender
or tortfeasor.
·
Ganacias
frustadas.
ARTICLE
2201. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the damages for which the obligor who
acted in good faith is liable shall be those that are the natural and probable
consequences of the breach of the obligation, and which the parties have
foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen at the time the obligation was
constituted.
In case of fraud, bad faith, malice
or wanton attitude, the obligor shall be responsible for all damages which may
be reasonably attributed to the performance of the obligation.
ARTICLE
2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendants shall be liable for all
damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission
complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or
could have reasonably foreseen by the defendant.
ARTICLE
2203. The party suffering loss or injury must exercise the diligence of a good
father of a family to minimize the damages resulting from the act or omission
in question.
ARTICLE
2204. In crimes, the damages to be adjudicated may be respectively increased or
lessened according to the aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Aggravating
circumstances
-
It
serves to increase the penalty because of the unusual perversity by the
offender.
-
If
there is no aggravating circumstance, exemplary damages shall not be imposed.
Mitigating
circumstance
-
It
serves to decrease the penalty imposable by law.
ARTICLE
2205. Damages may be recovered:
(1)
For
the loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent
personal injury;
(2)
For
injury to the plaintiff’s business standing of commercial credit.
Formula
for Computation
Unearned
Income
-
Net
earning capacity (X) = life expectancy x gross annual income less living
expenses (50% of gross annual income).
Life expectancy
-
2/3
x (80 – age of the deceased)
ARTICLE
2206. The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall
be at least Three thousand pesos, even though there may have been mitigating
circumstances. In addition:
(1)
The
defendant shall be liable for the loss
of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the
heirs of the latter, such indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded
by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability
not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death;
(2)
If
the deceased was obliged to give support according to the provisions of Article
291. (195 FC), the recipient who is not an heir called to the decedent’s
inheritance by the law of the testate or intestate succession, may demand
support from the person causing the death, for a period not exceeding five
years, the exact duration to be fixed by the court;
(3)
The
spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased
may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the
deceased.
Cases
where Article 2206 was not applicable
1.
The
father of the fetus which was aborted without the former’s consent is not
entitled to recover from the aborting doctor actual damages.
2.
The
brother of a person
3.
Expenses
relating to 9th day, 40th day and 1st year
death anniversaries as these are incurred after considerable lapse of time from
the burial of the victim.
4.
Where
the widow of the victim did not testify on any mental anguish or emotional
distress which she suffered.
5.
When
the offense filed is only for illegal possession of firearm and the killing
merely aggravated it.
ARTICLE
2207. If the plaintiff’s property has been insured, and he has received
indemnity for the insurance company from the injury or loss arising out of
wrong or breach of contract complained of, the insurance company shall be
subrogated to the rights of the insured against the wrongdoer or the person who
has violated the contract. If the amount paid by the insurance company does not
fully cover the injury or loss, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to
recover the deficiency from the person causing the loss or injury.
Principle
of subrogation
Instances
when principle of subrogation does not apply.
1.
When
the assured by his own act releases the wrongdoer or third person liable for
the loss or damage, from liability.
2.
When
the insurer pays the assured the value of the loss goods without notifying the
carrier who has good faith settled the assured’s claim for loss.
3.
When
the insurer pays the assured for a loss which is not a risk covered by the
policy.
ARTICLE
2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney’s fees and expenses of
litigation, other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except:
(1)
When
exemplary damages are awarded;
(2)
When
the defendant’s act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with
third persons or to incur expenses to protect his interest;
(3)
In
criminal cases of malicious prosecution against plaintiff;
(4)
In
case of a clearly unfounded civil action or proceeding against the plaintiff;
(5)
Where
the defendant acted in gross and evident bad faith in refusing to satisfy the
plaintiff’s plainly valid, just and demandable claim;
(6)
In
actions for legal support;
(7)
In
actions for recovery of wages of household helpers, laborers and skilled
workers;
(8)
In
actions for indemnity under workmen’s compensation and employer’s liability
laws;
(9)
In
a separate civil action to recover civil liability arising from a crime;
(10)
When
at least double judicial costs are awarded;
(11)
In
any other case where the court deems it just and equitable that attorney’s fees
and expenses of litigation should be recovered;
In all cases, the attorney’s fees
and expenses of litigation must be reasonable.
Two
concepts of Attorney’s fees
1.
Ordinary
concept
·
The
reasonable compensation paid to lawyer for the legal services he has rendered
to a client who has engaged him.
·
Quantum
meruit – as much as one deserves.
2.
Extraordinary
concept
·
An
indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party to
the prevailing party in a litigation
·
Stipulation
on payment: the fees agreed upon are in the nature of liquidated damages.
Elements
of Malicious Prosecution
1.
That
the defendant was the prosecutor or that he instigated the commencement of the
criminal action;
2.
That
the plaintiff was acquitted;
3.
That
the prosecutor acted without probable cause; and
4.
That
he was actuated by improper and sinister motives.
ARTICLE
2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the
debtors incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation
to the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the
absence of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six percent per annum.
Reckoning
period for payment of interest
-
From
the date of demand (Judicial or extrajudicial demand)
ARTICLE
2210. Interest may, in the discretion of the court, be allowed upon damages
awarded for breach of contract.
Reckoning
period
-
From
the date of judgment of the trial court was rendered.
ARTICLE
2211. In crimes and quasi-delicts, interest as a part of the damages may, in
proper case, be adjudicated in the discretion of the court.
ARTICLE
2212. Interest due shall earn legal interest from the time it is judicially
demanded, although obligation may be silent on this point
Accrued
interest
-
Interest
due in an obligation.
ARTICLE
2213. Interest cannot be recovered upon unliquidated claims or damages, except
when the demand can be established with reasonable certainty.
ARTICLE
2214. In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff shall
reduce the damages that he may recover.
ARTICLE
2015. In contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts, the court may equitably
mitigate the damages under circumstances other than the case referred to in the
preceding article, as in the following instances:
(1)
That
the plaintiff himself has contravened the terms of the contract;
(2)
That
the plaintiff has derived some benefit as a result of the contract;
(3)
In
cases where exemplary damages are to be awarded, that the defendant acted upon
the advice of counsel;
(4)
That
the loss would have resulted in any event;
(5)
That
since the filing of the action, the defendant has done his best to lessen the
plaintiff’s loss or injury.
CHAPTER III
OTHER KINDS OF DAMAGES
ARTICLE
2216. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal,
temperate, liquidated or exemplary damages may be adjudicated. The assessment
of such damages, except liquidated ones, is left to the discretion of the
court, according to the circumstances
ARTICLE
2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for awarding moral
damages if the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages
are justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where the
defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
Malice
or bad faith
-
It
implies a conscious or intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest
purpose or moral obliquity.
-
It
includes gross, but not simple negligence.
ARTICLE
2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff,
which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or
recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss
suffered by him.
Nominal
damages
-
Are
not for indemnification of loss but for vindication of right violated.
No comments:
Post a Comment