Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Bueno V Gloria (Issue 2)
Bueno V Gloria (Issue 2)
1
Corliss v. Manila Railroad Co., G.R. No. L-21291, March 28, 1969.
2
G.R. No. 129792, December 21, 1999
especially when she has no one to leave the child home with. On the day of
the accident, the child, Ricky, was walking along the aisles with her. If there
would have been a momentary period where the child walked ahead or
behind his mother, it would have not been a significant distance that would
connote a form of abandonment by the mother. She would have been only a
few feet away from the child and cannot be held to be negligent in looking
after her child.
At the time of the accident, the mother was indeed shopping for
groceries and the defendant alleged that because of that error in judgment,
she was negligent when she let her child slip away from her control, and
when she allowed the child to ran after the ball.
The proximate cause of the child, Ricky’s, injuries was the puddle of
syrup on the floor which caused him to slide. In the maintenance and
4 Ramos vs. C.O.L Realty Corp. G.R. No. 184905, Aug. 28, 2009.
observance of cleanliness of the supermarket premises, that responsibility
solely rests on the owners and managers therefore of the establishment.
As stated in National Power Corp. vs. Heirs of Noble Casionan,
contributory negligence is 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.5 There
is contributory negligence when the party's act showed lack of ordinary care
and foresight that such act could cause him harm or put his life in danger.6
It is an act or omission amounting to want of ordinary care on the part of the
person injured which, concurring with the defendant's negligence, is the
proximate cause of the injury.7