Torts and Damages: San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law
215
MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

TORTS AND DAMAGES
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

 CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla  ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad  EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy Gayon
 SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma. Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
216
I. TORTS tortious conduct  The omission independent

can sue the of that degree bases of liability
TORT tortfeasor. of diligence or causes of
 An unlawful  The primary which is action.
violation of purpose of a tort required by the  A single act
private right, action is to nature of the or omission may
not created by provide obligation and give rise to two
contract, and compensation to corresponding to or more causes
which gives rise a person who the of action.
to an action for was injured by circumstances of
damages. the tortious persons, time
 It is an act conduct of the and place.
or omission defendant. (Article 1173
producing an Civil Code) Culpa Contractual Culpa Aquilian
 Preventive The foundation of
injury to remedy is the liability of the It is a sepa
another, without available in Kinds of defendant
any previous Negligence: source of obliga
some cases. independent
existing lawful 1. Culpa
is the contract contract
relation of Classes of Contractual In quasi-delict the
which the said Torts: (contractual presumptive
act or omission negligence) In breach of contract
committed through responsibility for t
may be said to  Governed by negligence of his
A. Negligent the negligence of
be a natural CC provisions on employee, the servants can be
Torts
outgrowth or Obligations and employer cannot rebutted by proof
B. Intentional the exercise of du
incident. Contracts, erase his primary and
Torts care in their selec
particularly direct liability by
NOTES: Arts. 1170 to invoking exercise of and supervision.
 An unborn C. Strict 1174 of the Civil diligence of a good
Liability Code. father of a family in
child is NOT
the selection and
entitled to supervision of the
damages. But 2. Culpa
employee.
the bereaved Aquiliana
parents may be A. NEGLIGENT (quasi-delict)
entitled to TORTS  Governed
mainly by Art. Culpa Aquiliana Crime
damages, on
damages  Involve 2176 of the Civil
inflicted directly Code Only involves private Affect the pu
voluntary acts or
upon them. concern interest
omissions which
(Geluz vs. CA, 2 result in injury 3. Culpa
SCRA 802) to others Criminal The Civil Code by The Revised P
(criminal means of indem- Code punishes
 Defendants without nification merely corrects criminal
in tort cases can intending to negligence)
 Governed by repairs the damage
either be cause the same
natural or or because the Art. 365 of the
Revised Penal Includes all acts in Punished only if th
artificial being. actor fails to which any kind of is a penal law cle
Corporations are exercise due Code.
fault or negligence covering them
civilly liable in care in intervenes
the same performing such NOTES:
manner as acts or Liability of
natural persons. omissions.  The 3 kinds Liability is direct and employer of
 Any person of negligence primary in quasi- actor-employee
who has been furnish delict subsidiary in crim
injured by NEGLIGENCE separate,
reason of a distinct, and QUASI-DELICT
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
 CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla  ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad  EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
 SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
217
 Whoever by  If not then before him. nature of his act

act or omission he is guilty of (Picart vs. and the harm
causes damage negligence. Smith) that may result
to another, 2. Could a  Negligence from action or
there being fault prudent is a conduct that inaction are
or negligence is man, in the creates an elements to be
obliged to pay case under undue risk of considered.
for the damage consideratio harm to others.
done. (Article n, foresee  The Circumstances
2176 Civil Code) harm as a determination of to consider in
result of the negligence is a determining
course question of negligence:
Essential pursued? foresight on the (PEST-GAP)
Requisites for a  If so, it was part of the actor 1. Time
quasi-delictual the duty of the – 2. Place
action: actor to take FORESEABILITY. 3. Emergency
1. Act or precautions to 
omission guard against Emergency
 Even if a
constituting harm. rule
particular injury
fault or GENERAL
was not
negligence; NOTES: RULE: An
foreseeable, the
2. Damage  Negligence risk is still
individual
caused by is a conduct - who
foreseeable if
the said act the suddenly
possibility of
or omission; determination of finds himself
injury is
and the existence of in a
foreseeable.
3. Causal negligence is situation of
relation concerned with danger and
 Forseeability is required
between the what the
involves the to act
damage and defendant did or
question of without
the act or did not do
PROBABILITY, much time
omission.  The
that is, the to consider
state of
existence of the best
Tests of mind of the
some real means that
Negligen actor is not
likelihood of may be
ce important;
some damage adopted to
1. Did the good faith or
and the avoid the
defendant in use of sound
likelihood is of impending
doing the judgment is
such appreciable danger is
alleged immaterial.
weight not guilty of
negligent The
reasonably to negligence if
act use the existence of
induce, action he fails to
reasonable negligence
to avoid it. undertake
care and in a given
caution case is not what
which an determined subsequentl
ordinarily by reference Calculation of y and upon
prudent to the Risk reflection
person personal  Interests are may appear
would have judgment to be balanced to be a
used in the but by the only in the sense better
same behavior of that the solution.
situation? the actor in purposes of the EXCEPTIO
the situation actor, the N: When the
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
218
emergency ordinary necessary 2. Physical

was brought reasonable capacity to Disability
by the prudent man understand and  Mere
individual’s a reasonable appreciate the weakness of a
own man deemed to nature and person will not
negligence. have knowledge consequence of be an excuse in
(Valenzuela of the facts that his acts. (Taylor negligence
vs. CA 253 a man should be vs. Meralco, 16 cases.
SCRA 303). expected to Phil 8)  However if
4. Gravity of know based on  Applying the defect amounts
Harm to be ordinary human provisions of the to a real
avoided experience. Revised Penal disability the
5. Alternative (PNR vs IAC, 217 Code, Judge standard of
Course of Action SCRA 409) Sangco takes the conduct is that
 If the - a prudent man view that a child of a reasonable
alternati who is expected who is 9 or person under
ve to know the below is like disability.
presente basic laws of conclusively
d to the nature and presumed to be 3. Experts and
actor is physics, e.g. incapable of professionals
too gravity. negligence. In  They should
costly, the other hand, exhibit the care
the SPECIAL RULES if the child is and skill of one
harm 1. Children above 9 years who is ordinarily
that may  The action but below 15, skilled in the
result of the child will there is a particular field
may be not necessarily disputable that he is in.
still be be judged presumption of  When a
consider according to the absence of person holds
ed standard of an negligence. himself out as
unforese adult. But if the  Absence of being competent
eable to minor is mature negligence does to do things
a enough to not necessarily requiring
reasona understand and mean absence of professional
ble man. appreciate the liability. skill, he will be
6. Social value nature and  Liability held liable for
or utility of consequence of negligence if he
without fault: a
activity his actions, he fails to exhibit
child under 9
7. Person will be the care and
years can still be
exposed to the considered skill of one
subsidiarily
risk negligent if he ordinarily skilled
liable with his
fails to exercise in the particular
property (Art.
GOOD FATHER due care and work which he
100, RPC)
OF A FAMILY precaution in attempts to do.
(pater the commission
 Absence of  An expert
familias): of such acts. negligence of will not be
- this is the the child may judged based on
standard of NOTES: not excuse the what a non-
conduct used in parents from
 The law
their vicarious
expert can
the Philippines fixes no foresee.
- a man of liability under  The rule
arbitrary age at
ordinary Art. 2180 NCC or regarding
which a minor
intelligence and Art. 221 FC. experts is
can be said to
prudence or an have the applicable not
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
219
only to be considered to  In A. VIOLATION

professionals prove determining the OF
who have negligence. question of RULES
undergone EXCEPTION: contributory AND
formal Under Art. 2185 negligence in STATUT
education. of the Civil performing such ES
Code, it is act, the age, 1. Statutes
4. Nature of presumed that a sex, and GENERAL
activity person driving a condition of the RULE: Violation
 There are motor vehicle passengers are of a statutory
activities which has been circumstances duty is
by nature negligent if at necessarily NEGLIGENCE PER
impose duties to the time of the affecting the SE (Cipriano vs.
exercise a mishap, he was safety of the CA,
higher degree of violating any passenger, and 263SCRA711).
diligence. traffic should be When the
Examples: regulation. considered. Legislature has
a. Banks, by (Cangco vs. spoken, the
the very nature 6. Insanity Manila Railroad standard of care
of their work,  The insanity Co. GR required is no
are expected to of a person does No.12191, longer what a
exercise the not excuse him October 14, reasonably
highest degree or his guardian 1918) prudent man
of diligence in from liability  Although would do under
the selection based on quasi- there is no the
and supervision delict. unequivocal circumstances
of their  Bases for statement of the but what the
employees. holding an rule, Valenzuela Legislature has
b. Common insane person vs. CA commanded.
carriers are liable for his 253SCRA303 EXCEPTIONS:
required to tort: appears to a. When
exercise a. Where one require a unusual
extraordinary of two innocent different conditions
diligence in the persons must standard of care occur and
vigilance over suffer a loss, it for women strict
their passengers should be borne under the observanc
and transported by the one who circumstances e may
goods. (Article occasioned it. indicated defeat the
1733 Civil b. To induce therein. purpose of
Code). those interested  However, the rule
in the estate of Dean Guido and may
5. Intoxication the insane Calabresi even lead
GENERAL person to believes that to adverse
RULE: Mere restrain and there should be results.
intoxication is control him. a uniform b. When the
not negligence, c. The fear standard statute
nor does the that an insanity between a men expressly
mere fact of would lead to and a women. provides
intoxication false claims of that
establish want insanity and Other Factors violation
of ordinary care. avoid liability. to Consider in of a
But it may be Determining statutory
one of the 7. Women Negligence: duty
circumstances to merely
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
220
establishes promulgated by establish Gross

a administrative absence of Negligence -
presumpti agencies is not negligence of its Negligence
on of negligence per driver by where there is
negligence se but may be evidence of a “want of even
. EVIDENCE OF custom of slight care and
NEGLIGENCE. automobile diligence.”
NOTE: Rule as drivers of Manila
to proof of 3. Private by which they PROOF OF
proximate Rules of habitually drove NEGLIGENCE
cause Conduct. their cars over GENERAL
GENERAL  Violation the railroad RULE:
RULE: Plaintiff of rules imposed crossings  If the
must show by private without plaintiff alleged
that the individuals (e.g. slackening in his complaint
violation of employers) is speed. The SC that he was
the statute is merely a rejected the damaged
the proximate POSSIBLE argument by because of the
or legal cause EVIDENCE OF ruling that: a negligent acts of
of the injury NEGLIGENCE. practice which is the defendant,
or that it dangerous to the plaintiff
substantially B. PRACTICE human life has the burden
contributed AND cannot ripen of proving such
thereto. CUSTOM into custom negligence.
(Sanitary  Compliance which will (Taylor vs.
Steam with the protect anyone MERALCO
Laundry, Inc. practice and who follows it. 16Phil8)
vs. CA custom in a  The
300SCRA20) community will C. COMPLIANCE quantum of
EXCEPTION: not WITH proof required is
In cases where automatically STATUT preponderance
the damage to result in a ES of evidence.
the plaintiff is finding that the  Compliance (Rule 133
the damage actor is not with a statute is Revised Rules of
sought to be guilty of not conclusive Court)
prevented by negligence. that there was EXCEPTIONS:
the statute. Non-compliance no negligence. Exceptional
In such cases, with the  Example: A cases when the
proof of practice or defendant can rules or the law
violation of custom in the still be held provides for
statute and community does liable for cases when
damage to the not necessarily negligence even negligence is
plaintiff may mean that the if he can presumed.
itself establish actor was establish that he A. Presumption
proximate negligent. was driving s of Negligence
cause.  In Yamada below the speed B. Res Ipsa
(Teague vs. vs. Manila limit. Loquitur
Fernandez Railroad Co., Compliance with
51SCRA181). the owner of an the speed limit
automobile is not conclusive A. Presumptio
2. Administra struck by a train that he was not ns of
tive Rule while crossing negligently Negligence
 Violation the tracks driving his car. 1. In motor
of a rule sought to vehicle mishaps,
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
221
the owner is use is Requisites of its neighbors

presumed indispensable to Res Ipsa when fire broke
negligent if he his occupation Loquitor: out in a Caltex
was in the or business. 1. The service station.
vehicle and he (Article 2188 accident The gasoline
could have used Civil Code) was of a station, with all
due diligence to 5. GENERAL kind which its appliances,
prevent the RULE: ordinarily equipment and
misfortune. Presumption of does not employees, was
(Article 2184 negligence of occur in the under the
Civil Code) the common absence of control of the
2. It is carrier arises in someone’s defendant. The
disputably case of loss, negligence; persons who
presumed that a destruction or 2. The knew how the
driver was deterioration of instrumental fire started
negligent if he the goods, or in ity which were the
had been found case of death or caused the defendant and
guilty of reckless injury of injury was its employees,
driving or passengers. under the but they gave no
violating traffic EXCEPTION: exclusive explanation
regulations at Upon proof of control and whatsoever.
least twice for exercise of management  The doctrine
the next extraordinary of the is not applicable
preceding two diligence. person if there is direct
months. (Article charged proof of absence
2184 Civil Code) B. Res Ipsa with or presence of
3. The driver Loquitur negligence; negligence.
of a motor and (S.D. Martinez,
vehicle is  “The thing 3. The injury et al vs. William
presumed or transaction suffered Van Buskirk)
negligent if at speaks for must not
the time of the itself.” have been
mishap, he was  It is a rule of due to any AFFIRMATIVE
violating any evidence voluntary DUTIES AND
traffic peculiar to the action or MISCELLANEOUS
regulation. law of contribution ACTIVITIES:
(Article 2185 negligence on the part 1. Duty to
Civil Code) which of the Rescue
4. GENERAL recognizes that person A. Duty to the
RULE: Prima prima facie injured; rescuer
facie negligence may absence of  The
presumption of be established in explanation defendants are
negligence of the absence of by the liable for the
the defendant direct proof, defendant. injuries to
arises if death or and furnishes a persons who
injury results substitute for rescue people in
from his specific proof of  In Africa vs. distress because
possession of negligence. Caltex (Phil.) of the acts or
dangerous Inc. Mar 31, omissions of the
weapons or 1966, defendant said defendants.
substance. Caltex was  There is
EXCEPTION: liable for liability to the
When such damage done to rescuer and the
possession or the property of law does not
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
222
discriminate is considered,  The b. Doctrine of

between the under certain owner is still Attractive
rescuer oblivious circumstances as liable if the Nuisance
to the peril and a crime against plaintiff is  One who
the one who security (Article inside his maintains on
counts the 275 RPC); and property by his premises
costs. No driver of a tolerance or dangerous
 The risk motor vehicle by implied instrumental
of rescue, if concerned in a permission. ities or
only not vehicular  Owner appliances
wanton, is born accident shall s of of a
of the occasion. leave the scene buildings or character
 One who of the accident premises likely to
was hurt trying without aiding owe duty of attract
to rescue the victim care to children in
another who was unless he is visitors. play, and
injured through excused from who fails to
negligence may doing so. exercise
recover (Section 55 RA ordinary
damages. 4136 [Land care to
(Santiago vs. De Transportation prevent
leon CA-GR and traffic children
No.16180-R Code]) from playing
March 21, 1960) therewith or
 Danger 2. Owners, resorting
of personal Proprietors and thereto, is
injury or death. Possessors of liable to a
Property child of
GENERAL tender years
RULE: The who is
owner has no injured
duty to take thereby,
B. Duty to reasonable care even if the
rescue towards a child is
GENERAL trespasser for technically a
RULE: There is his protection or trespasser in
no general duty even to protect the
to rescue; a him from premises.
person is not concealed NOTE: A
liable for quasi- danger. swimming
delict even if he NOTE: Damage pool or pond
did not help a to any person or reservoir
person in resulting from of water is
distress. the exercise of NOT
EXCEPTIONS: A any rights of considered
limited duty to ownership is attractive
rescue is damage without nuisance.
imposed in injury (Damnum (Hidalgo
certain cases: absque injuria) Enterprises
Abandonment of vs. Baladan
persons in EXCEPTIONS: 91 Phil 488)
danger and a. Visitors and
abandonment of tolerated
one’s own victim possession
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
223
c. State of a manner as to maintaining the the Labor

Necessity injure the rights same: Articles Code.
 The of others. 2190 and 2191.  In quasi-
owner of a (Article 431  Third delictual
thing has no Civil Code). persons who actions
right to  Hence the suffered against the
prohibit the exercise of the damages may employer,
interference right of the proceed only the
of another owner may give against the employee
with the rise to an action engineer or may use the
same if the based on quasi- architect or provisions of
interference delict if the contractor if the the Labor
is necessary owner damage referred Code which
to avert negligently to in Articles imposes
imminent exercises such 2190 and upon the
danger and right to the 2191should be a employer
the prejudice of result of any certain
threatened another. defect in duties with
damage, construction. respect to
compared to Liability of  Nevertheless the proper
the damage P , actions for maintenance
arising to r damages can of the work
the owner o still be place or the
from the p maintained provisions of
interference r under Article adequate
, is much i 2176 for facilities to
greater. e damages ensure the
(Article 432 t resulting from safety of the
Civil Code) o proprietor’s employees.
 It is also r failure to  Articles 1711
a recognized s exercise due and 1712 of
justifying care in the the Civil
circumstanc o maintenance of Code impose
e under the f his building and liability
RPC. that he used his without
 In both b property in such fault on the
the Civil u a way that he part of the
Code and i injured the employers.
the RPC, the l property of
owner may d another. B. Employees
demand i  Employees
from the n 3. Employers are bound to
person g and Employees exercise due
benefited, s A. Employers care in the
indemnity  New Civil  Actions for performance
for the Code include quasi-delict of their
damages. provisions that can still be functions for
apply to maintained the
Use of proprietors of a even if employers;
properties that building or employee’s absence
injures another structure which compensatio such due
 An owner involve n is provided care, the
cannot use his affirmative duty for under employee
property in such of due care in
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
224
may be held action based on  It negligence.

liable. quasi delict. enunciates the (Ramos vs. CA,
(Air France vs liability of the GR No.124354,
4. Banks Carrascoso, surgeon not only December 29,
 The business L21438, Sept. for the wrongful 1999)
of banks is one 28, 1996) acts of those  Example:
affected by under his The doctrine
public interest. 6. Doctors physical control was applied in a
Because of the A. STANDARD OF but also those case of removal
nature of its CARE wherein he has of the wrong
functions, a  The extension of part of the body
bank is under proper standard control. when another
obligation to is whether, the C. NOT part was
treat the physician if a WARRANTORS intended.
accounts of its general  Physicians
depositors with practitioner, has are not  Two
meticulous exercised the warrantors of pronged
care, always degree of care cures or insurers evidence:
having in mind and skill of the against personal a. Evidence as
the fiduciary average injuries or death to the
nature of their qualified of the patient. recognized
relationship. practitioner, standards of
(PBC vs. CA taking into D. PROOF the medical
[1997]) account the  Expert community
advances in the testimony in the
5. Common profession. should be particular
carriers  A offered to prove kind of case;
 From the physician who that the and
nature of their holds himself circumstances b. A showing
business and for out as a are constitutive that the
reasons of public specialist should of conduct physician
policy, they are be held to the falling below the departed
bound to standard of care standard of care from this
exercise and skill of the employed by standard in
extraordinary average member other physicians his
diligence in the of the profession in good standing treatment.
vigilance over practicing the when  Four
the goods and specialty, taking performing the elements in
the safety of the into account the same operation. medical
passengers. advances in the  Medical negligence
 The case profession. malpractice can cases: duty,
against the also be breach, injury
common carrier B. THE CAPTAIN established by and proximate
is for the OF THE SHIP relying on the causation
enforcement of DOCTRINE doctrine of res
an obligation  The head ipsa loquitor; in E. LIABILITY OF
arising from surgeon is made which case the HOSPITALS AND
breach of liable for need of expert CONSULTANTS
contract. everything that testimony is  There is
 The same goes wrong dispensed with no employer-
act which within the four because the employee
breached the corners of the injury itself relationship
contract may operating room. provides the between the
give rise to an proof of hospital and a
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
225
physician damages. recover

admitted in the 7. Lawyers (Article damages
said hospital’s  An attorney 2179 Civil but the
medical staff as is not bound to Code) courts
an active or exercise b. Contribut shall
visiting extraordinary ory mitigate
consultant diligence but negligenc the
which would only a e damages
hold the hospital reasonable  Conduct to be
liable solidarily degree of care on the awarded
liable for the and skill, having part of the (Article
injury suffered reference to the injured 2179 Civil
by a patient business he party Code).
under Article undertakes to contributi  Doctrine
2180 of the Civil do. ng as a of
Code. (Ramos legal Comparati
vs. CA GR No DEFENSES IN cause to ve
124354, April NEGLIGENCE the harm Negligenc
11, 2002) CASES he has e
 The Kinds of suffered 
contract defenses: which falls The
between the A. Complete – below the relative
consultant and completely standard degree of
the patient is bars to which negligence
separate and recovery he is of the
distinct the B. Partial – required parties is
contract mitigates to considered
between the liability conform in
hospital and for his determini
the patient. 1. PLAINTIFFS own ng
The first has for CONDUCT protection whether
its object the AND . and to
rendition of CONTRIBUT (Valenzuel what
medical services ORY a vs. CA degree,
by the NEGLIGENC 253SCRA3 either
consultant to E 03) should be
the patient, a. Plaintiffs  If the responsibl
while the own plaintiffs e for his
second concerns negligenc negligence negligence
the provision by e as the was only (apportion
the hospital of proximat contributo ment of
facilities and e cause ry, the damages).
services by its  When the immediate 
staff such as plaintiffs and This is the
nurses and own proximate doctrine
laboratory negligence cause of being
personnel was the the injury applied in
necessary for immediate being the our
the proper and defendant jurisdictio
treatment of the proximate ’s lack of n wherein
patient. (Ramos cause of due care, the
vs. CA GR No his injury, the contributo
124354, April he cannot plaintiff ry
11, 2002) recover may negligence
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
226
of the negligence s the humanized

plaintiff of another is “caso and removed
does not imputed to fortuito,” from the rules
completel the plaintiff. or if it can applicable to
y bar  It is be acts of God.
recovery applicable if foreseen, (NAPOCOR vs.
but merely the it must be CA [1993])
results in negligence impossible GENERAL
mitigation was on the to avoid; RULE: It is a
of part of the c. The complete
liability; it person for occurrenc defense and a
is a partial whom the e must be person is not
defense. plaintiff is such as to liable if the
 responsible, render it cause of the
The court and impossible damage is a
is free to especially, for the fortuitous
determine by debtor to event.
the extent negligence fulfill his EXCEPTION:
of the of an obligation It is merely a
mitigation associate in in a partial
of the the normal defense and
defendant transaction manner; the courts may
’s liability where he and mitigate the
depending was injured. d. The damages if the
upon the obligor loss would
circumstan 3. FORTUITOU must be have resulted
ces. S EVENTS free from in any event
 Essential any (Art. 2215(4)
2. IMPUTED requisites: participati Civil Code).
CONTRIBUT a. The cause on in the
ORY of the aggravatio 4. ASSUMPTIO
NEGLIGENC unforesee n of the N OF RISK
E n and injury  Volenti non
 Negligence unexpecte resulting fit injuria: One
is imputed if d to the is not legally
the actor is occurrenc creditor. injured if he has
different e, or of NOTE: When consented to the
from the the failure an act of God act complained
person who of the concurs with of or was willing
is being debtor to the negligence that it should
made liable. comply of defendant occur.
 The with his to produce an
defendant obligation, injury, the  It is a
will be must be defendant is complete
subject to independe liable if the defense.
mitigated nt of the injury would
liability human not have  Elements:
even if the will; resulted but
plaintiff was b. It must be for his own
impossible negligent a. The
not himself
to foresee conduct or plaintiff must
personally
the event omission. The know that the
negligent
which whole risk is present;
but because
the constitute occurrence is
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
227
b. He must the waiver is ii. Contractual b) W

further valid and may Relation hen a
understand its be construed as s passenger
nature; and that a condonation of boards a
the obligation.  There common
c. His choice may be carrier, he
to incur it is implied takes the
free and b. Implied assumption risks
voluntary. Assumptions of risk if the incidental to
plaintiff the mode of
 KINDS: i. Dangerous entered into travel he has
Conditions a taken.
a. Express contractual
waiver of the  A relation with iii. Dangerous
right to recover person who, the Activitie
knowing defendant. s
that he is By entering
 There is into a  Person
assumption of exposed to a
dangerous relationship s who
risk if the freely and
condition voluntarily
plaintiff, in voluntarily
voluntarily participate
advance has where the
assumes the in dangerous
expressly waived negligence
risk of such activities
his right to of the
dangerous assume the
recover damages defendant is
condition risks which
for the negligent obvious, the
may not are usually
act of the plaintiff may
recover present in
defendant. be found to
from the such
defendant accept and activities.
NOTE: A person consent to
who
cannot contract it.
maintained  EXAMP
away his right to
such LE: A
recover damages  EXAMP
dangerous professional
resulting from LES:
conditions. athlete is
negligence.
 Examp deemed to
Such waiver is
le: A person a) Th assume the
contrary to
who main- e employees risks of
public policy
tained his assume the injury to
and cannot be
house near a ordinary their trade.
allowed.
railroad risks
However, the
track inherent in iv. Defendant’s
waiver
assumes the the industry negligen
contemplated by
usual in which he ce
this prohibition
dangers is employed.
is the waiver of
attendant to  When
the right to
the opera- - As to the plaintiff
recover before
tion of a abnormal is aware of
the negligent
locomotive. risks, there the risk
act was
(Rodrigueza must be created by
committed.
vs. Manila cogent and the
If waiver
Railroad convincing defendant’s
was made after
Co., GR No. evidence of negligence,
the cause of
15688, Nov. consent. yet he
action accrued,
19, 1921).
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
228
voluntarily  An action defense in independent

decided to based on quasi- quasi-delict force merely
proceed to delict prescribes cases and the took advantage
encounter in four years defendant is of to accomplish
it, there is from the date of therefore not something not
an implied the accident. liable if force the natural
admission. (Article 1146 was exerted on effect thereof.
Civil Code) him. (Aquino,
 EXAMP Torts and Nearest Cause
LE: If the Relations Back Damages)  That cause
plaintiff has Doctrine which is the last
been  An act done  EXAMPLE: link in the chain
supplied at one time When the of events; the
with a is defendant was nearest in point
product considered forced to drive of time or
which he by fiction of his vehicle by relation.
knows to be law to have armed men. He  Proximate
unsafe, he is been done was, at pain of cause is not
deemed to at some death, forced to necessarily the
have antecedent drive at a very nearest cause
assumed the period. fast clip because but that which is
risk of using (Allied the armed men the procuring
such unsafe Banking were escaping efficient and
product. Corp vs. CA, from the predominant
1989) policemen. The cause.
 EXAMPLE: A defendant Concurrent
5. DEATH OF doctor cannot be held Causes
THE negligently liable, if a  The actor is
DEFENDANT transfused bystander is hit liable even if
 Death of the blood to a as a the active and
defendant does patient that consequence. substantially
not extinguish was
simultaneous
the obligation contaminate
operation of the
based on quasi- d with HIV. CAUSATION effects of a
delict. If the effect
third person’s
 An action became Proximate innocent,
survives even if apparent Cause tortious or
the defendant only after  That cause criminal act is
dies during the five (5) which in natural also a
pendency of the years, the and continuous substantial
case if the case four (4) year sequence, factor in
is an action to prescriptive unbroken by any bringing about
recover for an period efficient the harm so long
injury to persons should intervening as the actor’s
or property by commence cause, produces negligent
reason of tort only when it the injury, conduct actively
committed by was without which and continuously
the deceased. It discovered. the result would operate to bring
is no defense at not have about harm to
all. occurred. another. (Africa
7. INVOLUNTA vs. Caltex)
RINESS Remote Cause  Where
6. PRESCRIPTI  It is a  That cause several causes
ON complete which some producing the
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
229
injury are defendant’s motion of the

concurrent and NOTE: Primary liability. final active
each is an cause remains (Policy test) injurious force
efficient cause the proximate CAUSE-IN-FACT which
without which cause even if TESTS: immediately
the injury would there is an 1. But-For produced or
not have intervening Test preceded the
happened, the cause which  The damage.
injury may be merely defendant’s NOTE: If the
attributed to all cooperated with conduct is the defendant’s
or any of the the primary cause-in-fact if conduct was
causes and cause and which damage would already
recovery may be did not break not have determined to
had against any the chain of resulted had be the cause in
or all of the causation. there been no fact of the
responsible negligence on plaintiff’s
persons. Tests of the part of the damage under
 Where the Proxima defendant. the but for test,
concurrent or te Cause Conversely, it is necessarily
successive  Two-part defendant’s the cause in fact
negligent acts or test negligent of the damage
omissions of two 1. Cause-in- conduct is not under the
or more persons, fact Test the cause in fact substantial
although acting 2. Policy Test of the plaintiff’s factor test.
independently, NOTE: In damage if the
are in determining the accident could 3. NESS Test
combination the proximate cause not have been  The
direct and of the injury, it avoided in the candidate
proximate cause is first necessary absence condition may
of a single injury to determine if thereof. still be termed
to a third the defendant’s as a cause
person, and it is negligence was 2. Substantial where it is
impossible to the cause-in- Factor test shown to be a
determine what fact of the  The conduct necessary
proportion each damage to the is the cause-in- element in just
contributed to plaintiff. fact of the one of several
the injury, (Cause-in-fact damage if it was co-present
either of them is test) a substantial causal set each
responsible for  factor in independently
the whole If the producing the sufficient for
injury, even defendant injuries. the effect.
though his act ’s  In order to
alone might not negligence be a substantial Two ways by
have caused the was not factor in which co-
entire injury; the cause- producing the presence may
they become in-fact, harm, the manifest itself:
joint tort- the inquiry causes set in a. D
feasors and are stops. motion by the uplicative
solidarily liable  defendant must causation
for the resulting If it is, the continue until  When
damage under inquiry shifts the moment of two or more
Article 2194 of to the the damage or sets operate
the Civil Code. question of at least down simultaneou
limit of the the setting in sly to
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
230
produce the Consequenc forces, which Cause and

effect; the e Test come into active Conditio
effect is 4. Hindsight operation later. ns
over- Test  It is no
determined. 5. Orbit of Risk Tests applied in longer
b. P Test the Philippines: practicable to
re-emptive 6. Substantial  New Civil distinguish
causation Factor Test Code has a between cause
 When, chapter on and condition.
though Policy Tests Damages which  The
coming may be divided specifies the defendant may
about first into Two kind of damage be liable even if
in time, one Groups: for which the only created
causal set 1. FORESIGHT defendant may conditions, if
trumps PERSPECTIVE/ be held liable the conditions
another FORESEEABILIT and the extent resulted in harm
potential set Y TESTS of damage to be to either person
lurking in  The awarded to the or property.
the defendant is not plaintiff.  EXAMPLES of
background; liable for the  Cause-in- Dangerous
the causal unforeseeable fact Tests: Conditions:
potency of consequences of 1. But-for 1. Those
the latter is his acts test that are
frustrated.  Liability is 2. Substant inherently
limited within ial Factor test dangerous
 Multiple the risk created 3. NESS 2. Those
causation by defendants’ test where a person
 If there negligent acts.  Policy test: places a thing
are a number of which is not
The directness
candidate 2. DIRECT dangerous in
approach is
conditions, PERSEPECTIVE/ itself in a
being applied in
which, taken DIRECT dangerous
this jurisdiction.
one at a time, COSEQUENCES position.
would not in TESTS 3. Those
NOTE: The
fact have been  The involving
definition of
sufficient to defendant is products and
proximate cause
cause the liable for other things
which includes
accident and the damages which which are
the element of
accident was a are beyond the dangerous
foresight is not
cumulative risk. because they
consistent with
effect of all the  Direct are defective.
the express
candidate consequences
provision of the
conditions. are those which Efficient
Article 2202 of
follow in Interven
the New Civil
Policy Tests: sequence from ing
Code; a person
1. Foreseeabili the effect of Cause
may be held
ty Test defendants act  One which
liable whether
2. Natural and upon conditions destroys the
the damage to
Probable existing and causal
the plaintiff may
Consequenc forces already in connection
be unforeseen.
e Test operation at the between the
3. Natural and time without negligent act
Ordinary or intervention of and the injury
Direct any external and thereby
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
231
negatives time the pre-emptive in together with

liability. negligent act is nature. normal
 There is NO committed. background
efficient  Foreseeable B. Compound conditions.
intervening intervening Causes  Negligence
cause if the causes cannot  Plaintiff’s of the plaintiff
force created by be considered negligence may cooperated with
the negligent sufficient have duplicative the negligence
act or omission intervening effect, that it, it of the defendant
have either: causes. is sufficient to in order to bring
1. Remaine  The bring about the about the
d active itself, intervention of effect but his injury;
or unforeseen and negligence determination of
2. Created unexpected occurs proximate cause
another cause is not simultaneously is only a matter
force which sufficient to with the of degree of
remained relieve the defendant; the participation.
active until wrongdoer from latter’s
it directly consequences of negligence is D. Defendant’s
caused the negligence if equally Negligence is
result, or such negligence sufficient but the Only cause
3. Created directly and not necessary to  Defendant’s
a new active proximately bring about the negligence was
risk of being cooperates with effect because sufficient AND
acted upon the independent damage would necessary to
by the cause in the still have bring about the
active force resulting injury. resulted due to injury.
that caused the negligence  However, if
the result. CONTRIBUTORY of the plaintiff. plaintiff’s
EXAMPLE: The NEGLIGENC  Plaintiff’s negligence
medical E negligence is not increased or
findings, show A. Plaintiff’s merely aggravated the
that the negligence is contributory resulting
infection of the the cause because it is a damage or
wound by  Plaintiff’s concurring injury liability of
tetanus was an proximate
negligence is not the defendant
efficient cause.
contributory if it should also be
intervening  No recovery
is necessary and mitigated under
cause later or
sufficient to can be had. contributory
between the
produce the (Aquino, Torts negligence rule
time Javier was
result. and Damages) or under the
wounded to the
time of his
 EXAMPLES: doctrine of
1. Only the C. Part of the avoidable
death. (People
plaintiff was same causal set consequences.
vs. Rellin 77
Phil 1038) negligent.  Neither Doctrine of Last
2. Defenda plaintiff’s Clear Chance or
nt’s negligence negligence nor Discovered
NOTES:
is not a part of defendant’s Peril
 A cause is the causal set negligence alone  The
not an negligence of
which is a part is sufficient to
intervening the plaintiff
of the causal cause the injury;
cause if it was does not
chain. the effect would
already in preclude a
3. Plaintiff’ result only if
operation at the recovery for the
s negligence was both are present
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
232
negligence of his negligence 1. If the consequences

the defendant was relatively plaintiff was not are substantially
where it appears minor as negligent. certain to result
that the compared with 2. The party from it.
defendant, by the wrongful act charged is
exercising or omission of required to act
reasonable care the defendant. instantaneously,
and prudence,  The doctrine and if the injury  They are
might have has no role in cannot be found in Chapter
avoided this jurisdiction avoided by the 2 of the
injurious where common application of Preliminary Title
consequences to law concept of all the means at of the NCC
the plaintiff contributory hand after the entitled “Human
notwithstanding negligence has peril is or should Relations”.
the plaintiff’s itself been have been Although this
negligence. rejected in discovered. chapter covers
Article 2179 of 3. If negligent acts,
Alternative the Civil Code. defendant’s the torts
Views: negligence is a mentioned
1. Prevailing 3. Third View concurrent herein are
view  There can cause and which mostly
 Doctrine is be no conflict was still in intentional in
applicable in between the operation up to nature or torts
this jurisdiction. doctrine of last the time the involving malice
 Even if clear chance injury was or bad faith.
plaintiff was and doctrine of inflicted.
guilty of comparative 4. Where the
antecedent negligence if the plaintiff, a
passenger, filed HUMAN
negligence, the former is viewed RELATIONS
defendant is still as a rule or an action
liable because phrase of against a carrier
based on 1. Principle of
he had the last proximate
contract. Abuse of Rights
clear chance of cause;
5. If the actor, (ART.19)
avoiding the  However,
injury. though
the doctrine of
negligent, was  Elements:
last clear
2. Minority not aware of the
chance is no
View danger or risk a. Legal
longer
 The brought about right or duty;
applicable if the
by the prior b. The
historical force created by
fraud or right or duty
function of the the plaintiff’s
negligent act. is exercised
doctrine was to negligence
mitigate the continues until in bad faith;
harshness of the the happening of and
common law the injurious B. INTENTIONA c. For the
rule of event. L TORTS sole intent
contributory  Include of
negligence Cases when the conduct where prejudicing
which prevented doctrine was the actor desires or injuring
any recovery at held to cause the another.
all by the inapplicable consequences of  EXAMPLE: If
plaintiff who (PICCA) his act or the principal
was also believes that unreasonably
negligent even if the terminated an
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
233
agency c. The act is or abuse of lust without

agreement for done with intent confidence on promising to
selfish reasons. to injure. the part of the marry the
(Valenzuela vs. NOTE: Damages seducer to offended party.
CA, 190 SCRA 1) are recoverable which the
NOTE: This rule even if no woman has  It may not
is a departure positive law was yielded. even matter
from the violated. (Gashem Shokat that the plaintiff
traditional view Baksh vs. CA) and the
that a person is  Kinds: defendant are of
not liable for the same
damages a. Breach of gender.
resulting from promise to
the exercise of
 Sexual
marry intercourse is
ones right.
not by itself a
GENERAL basis for
RULE: Breach of recovery; c. Sexual
2. Article 20 promise to damages could assault
of the Civil marry by itself is only be awarded
Code not actionable. if the sexual
intercourse is
 Defendant is
EXCEPTION:
 Speaks of liable for all
In cases where not a product of
forms of sexual
the general there is another voluntariness or
assault including
sanction for all act independent mutual desire.
crimes defined
other provisions of the breach of
under the RPC
of law which do promise to
as rape, acts of
not especially marry which
lasciviousness
provide for their gives rise to b. Seduction and seduction.
own sanction. liability: without breach
of promise to
NOTE: Article 20 1. Cases where marry
does not there was
distinguish; the financial d. Desertion
act may be done
 Seduction, by a spouse
damage.
by itself, is also
willfully or 2. Social
an act contrary
negligently. humiliation
to morals, good
 A spouse has
caused to one of a legal
customs and
the parties. obligation to
public policy.
3. Acts contra live with his/her
bonus mores 3. Where there spouse.
(Article 21 Civil was moral  The
Code) seduction. defendant is
liable if he
 If a spouse
does not
employed
 Elements: NOTES: perform his/her
deceit,
duty to the
enticement,
a. Act which is  Moral other, he may
superior power
legal; seduction, be liable for
or abuse of
b. The act is although not damages for
confidence in
contrary to punishable, such omission
successfully
morals, good connotes the because the
having sexual
customs, public idea of deceit, same is contrary
intercourse with
order or public enticement, to law, morals,
another even if
policy; and superior power good customs
he satisfied his
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
234
and public whatever is personal 

policy. built or property for Example: If
planted or the purpose a company
to compel of obtaining disconnects
the builder possession the
e. Trespass or planter to of real electricity
and Deprivation purchase the property service
of Property portion without
encroached  EXAM prior notice
upon. PLE: The as required
 2 KINDS: (Aquino, by the rules,
defendant
Torts and who was the company
1) Tres Damages) landlord, commits a
pass to was held tort under
and/or  A liable Article 21
deprivation builder in because he NCC.
of real good faith deprived the
property who acted plaintiffs,
negligently his tenants,
 Liabil may be held of water in f. Abortion
ity for liable under order to and Wrongful
damages Art. 2176 force them Death
under the NCC. to vacate
RPC and the lot they
Article 451 were
 Damages
2) Tres may be
of the Civil pass to or cultivating.
Code recovered by
deprivation (Magbanua
requires both spouses if:
of personal vs. IAC 137
intent or property SCRA 352)
bad faith. 1) t
he abortion was
 In 3) Disc
caused through
 Articl the field of onnection of
the physician’s
e 448 of the tort, electricity
negligence, or
Civil Code in trespass or gas
relation to extends to service
Article 456 2) w
all cases as done
does not where a 
permit intentionally
person is The right to without their
action for deprived of disconnect
damages consent
his personal and deprive
where the property the
builder, even in the customer,  Husband of
planter, or absence of who a woman who
sower acted criminal unreasonabl voluntarily
in good liability. y fails to pay procured her
faith. The his bills, of abortion may
landowner is electricity recover damages
NOTE: It
limited to should be from the
may cover
the options exercised in physician who
cases where
given to him accordance caused the same
the
under with the law on account of
defendant
article 448, and rules. distress and
was
that is to mental anguish
deprived of
appropriate attendant to the
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
235
loss of the customs and  Elements:  Acquittal

unborn child and public policy. presupposes
the 1. The fact that a criminal
disappointment  EXAMPLE: of the information is
of his parental False imputation prosecution and filed in court
expectation. of misdeed to the further fact and final
(Geluz vs. CA justify dismissal that the judgment
2SCRA802) or any similar defendant was rendered
manner of himself the dismissing the
dismissal which prosecutor; and case;
is done that the action nevertheless,
g. Illegal abusively. was finally prior acquittal
Dismissal terminated with may include
an acquittal; dismissal by the
prosecutor after
 The right of preliminary
the employer to h. Malicious 2. That in
bringing the investigation.
dismiss an Prosecution (Globe Mackay
employee should action, the
prosecutor and Radio Corp.
not be confused  An action vs. CA; Manila
with the manner acted without
for damages Gas Corp vs. CA)
in which the probable cause;
brought by one
right is against another
exercised and whom a criminal 3. The
the effects prosecution, prosecutor was
flowing actuated or i. Public
civil suit, or
therefrom; impelled by Humiliation
other legal
proceeding has legal malice.
 If the been instituted  Damages
dismissal was maliciously and may be awarded
done anti- without NOTES: in cases where
socially and probable cause, the plaintiff
oppressively, after the  Malice is the suffered
the employer termination of inexcusable humiliation
should be such intent to injure, through the
deemed to have prosecution, suit oppress, vex, positive acts of
violated Article or proceeding in annoy or the defendant
1701 of the Civil favor of the humiliate. directed against
Code (which defendant the plaintiff.
 Presence of
prohibits acts of therein. probable cause
oppression by signifies absence  Example:
either capital or  The gist of of malice. The defendant
labor against the the action is was held liable
other) and putting legal for damages
Article 21 NCC.  Absence of
under Art. 21 for
process in force malice signifies
regularly, for slapping the
good faith on
 An employer mere purpose of plaintiff in
the part of the
may be held vexation or public. (Patricio
defendant; good
liable for injury. (Drilon vs. Hon. Oscar
faith may even
damages if the vs. CA [1997]) Leviste, [1989])
be based on
manner of mistake of law.
dismissing is
contrary to NOTES:
morals good
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
236
 Under expectation death of the another’s

Article 21, is one that person. property. It
damages are the society EXCEPTION: A includes cases
recoverable recognizes privilege may be when the
even though no as given to the defendant
positive law was reasonable. surviving invades one’s
violated. relatives of a privacy by
 An action NOTES: deceased person looking from
can only prosper GENERAL to protect his outside
when damage, RULE: Right to memory but the (Example:
material or privacy can be privilege exist “peeping-tom”).
otherwise, was invoked only by for the benefit GENERAL
suffered by the natural persons; of the living, to RULE: There is
plaintiff. An Juridical persons protect their no invasion of
action based on cannot invoke feelings and to right to privacy
Articles 19-21 such right prevent the when a
will be dismissed because the violation of their journalist
if the plaintiff entire basis of own rights in the records
merely seeks right to privacy character and photographs or
“recognition”. is an injury to memory of the writes about
 Under the feelings and deceased. something that
sensibilities of a  occurs in public
Articles 19 and
party, a Standard to be places.
21, the
corporation applied in EXCEPTION:
defendant may
would have no determining if When the acts of
likewise be
such ground. there was a the journalist
guilty of a tort
even if he acted
EXCEPTION: violation of the should be to
Right against right is that of a such extent that
in good faith.
unreasonable person with it constitutes
(Grand Union
searches and ordinary harassment or
Supermarket vs.
seizure can be sensibilities. It overzealous
Espino)
invoked by a is relative to the shadowing.
juridical entity. customs of time The freedom
TORTS AGAINST
and place and is of the press has
HUMAN DIGNITY
TYPES:
GENERAL determined by never been
RULE: Right to the norm of an construed to
1. Violation
privacy is purely ordinary person. accord newsmen
of the right of
personal in immunity from
privacy
nature, hence: Four Types of tort or crimes
 Reasonablen
1) It can be Invasion of committed
ess of a person’s
invoked only by Privacy during the
expectation of
the person a. course of the
privacy depends
whose privacy is Intrusion newsgathering.
on a two-part
claimed to have upon plaintiff’s  There is
test:
been violated. seclusion or no intrusion
a) Whether
2) It can be solitude or into when an
by his
subject to his private employer
conduct, the
waiver of the affairs investigates an
individual
person whose  It is not employee or
has
privacy is sought limited to cases when the school
exhibited an
to be intruded where the investigates its
expectation
into. defendant student.
of privacy.
3) The right physically  RA 4200
b) Whether
ceases upon the trespassed into makes it illegal
this
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
237
for any person involves his the violation public

not authorized status as a of the right. concern.
by all the student or  T
parties to any affects the  P he
private good name UBLIC FIGURE - publication
communication and A person, who of facts
to secretly reputation by his derived from
record such of the accomplishment the records
communication school. s, fame or mode of official
by means of a of living or by proceedings
tape recorder b. adopting a which are
(Ramirez vs CA, Publication profession or not
Sept. 28, 1995) of calling which otherwise
 Use of a Embarrassi gives the public declared by
telephone ng Private a legitimate law as
extension for Facts interest in his confidential,
purposes of  R doings, his cannot be
overhearing a equisites: affairs and his considered a
private 1. Publicity character. tortious
conversation is given to conduct.
without any private NOTE: Public
authorization or purely figures, most c.
does not violate personal especially those Publicity
RA 4200. information holding which
NOTE: There about a responsible places a
are instances person; positions in person in a
where the 2. Without government false light
school might be the latter’s enjoy a more in the
called upon to consent; and limited right to public eye
exercise its 3. Regardle privacy  The
power over its ss of compared to interest to
student for acts whether or ordinary be
committed not such individuals. protected in
outside the publicity  T this tort is
school premises constitutes a he interest the interest
and beyond criminal sought to be of the
school hours in offense, like protected is individual in
the following: libel or the right to not being
1. In cases defamation, be free from made to
of violation the unwarranted appear
of school circumstanc publicity, before the
policies or e that the from the public in an
regulations publication wrongful objectionabl
occurring in was made publicizing e false light
connection with intent of the or false
with school of gain or private position.
sponsored for affairs and EXAMPLE:
activity off- commercial activities of Defendant
campus; or and business an individual was held
2. In cases purposes which are liable for
where the invariably outside the damages
misconduct serves to realm of when he
of the aggravate legitimate published an
student unauthorize
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
238
d biography  isThe gist of

the statements tells which the plaintiff Humiliatio
something
of a famous good held the tort is n
baseballabout the plaintiff an  Discriminati
player interference on against a
exaggerating d. with one person on
his feats on Commercial spouse’s account of
the baseball appropriati mental his physical
field, on of attitude defect,
portraying likeness toward the which
him as a war  The other and causes
hero. unwarranted the conjugal emotional
(Spahn vs. publication kindness of distress,
Messner) of a person’s marital may result
 If the name or the relations in liability
publicity unauthorize resulting in on the part
given to the d use of his some actual of the
plaintiff is photograph conduct offending
defamatory, or likeness which party.
hence an for materially  Sexual
action for commercial affects it. Harassment
libel is also purposes is  It extends to falls under
warranted; an invasion all cases of this
the action of privacy. wrongful category.
for invasion  With interference - a civil action
of privacy respect to in the family separate
will afford celebrities, affairs of and distinct
an however, others from the
alternative the right of whereby one criminal
remedy. publicity is spouse is action may
 May be often induced to be
committed treated as a leave the commenced
by the separate other spouse under RA
media by right that or conduct 7877.
distorting a overlaps but himself or - 2 types of
news report. is distinct herself that Sexual
from the the comfort harassment:
Tort of Putting Defamation right of of married a) quid pro
Another in False privacy. life is quo cases
Light They treat destroyed. b) hostile
1. As to gravamen of claim their names  If the environment
The gravamen of The gravamen ofand likeness interference cases
claim is not the claim is the reputa-as property is by the
reputational harm tional harm and they parents of TORTS WITH
but rather the want to the spouse, INDEPENDENT
embarrassment of a control and malice must CIVIL ACTIONS
person being made profit
into some-thing he is be proven. 1. Violation of
therefrom. civil and
not
2. As to publication 3. Intriguing to political
The statement should Publication 2. isInterferenc Cause rights
be actually made in satisfied if a letter is e with Alienation (Article 32)
public sent to a third person Family  Although the
3. As to the defamatory character of the and other 4. Vexation same
statements relations and normally
Defendant may still What is published involves
be held liable even if lowers the esteem in
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
239
intentional in b. It on to a
acts, it can reputation must be single
also be and good maliciou individual is
committed name, by s sufficient
through communicati c. It publication.
negligence. on to others must be GENERAL
 Public which tends given RULE: Every
officer who to diminish publicity defamatory
is a the esteem d. The imputation
defendant in which the victim is presumed
cannot plaintiff is must be to be
escape held, or to identifia malicious,
liability excite ble even if it be
under the adverse true, if no
doctrine of feelings or NOTES: good
state opinion  Test in intention or
immunity; against him. determining justifiable
the said  Includes the motive for
doctrine the crime of defamatory making it is
applies only libel and character of shown.
if acts slander. the EXCEPTIO
involved are  RPC imputation: A NS:
done by considers charge is 1. A
officers in the sufficient if private
the statement the words are commun
performance defamatory calculated to ication
of their if it is an induce the made by
official duty imputation hearers to any
within the of suppose and person
ambit of circumstanc understand to
their e tending to that the another
powers; cause the person/s in the
officers do dishonor, against whom perform
not act discredit or they were ance of
within the contempt of uttered were any
ambit of natural or guilty of a legal,
their powers juridical certain moral or
if they person or to offense, or are social
violate the blacken the sufficient to duty;
constitution memory of impeach their and
al rights of one who is honesty, 2. A
persons. dead. virtue, or fair and
 Requisit reputation, or true
2. Defamation, es for one to hold the report,
Fraud, and to be liable person/s up to made in
Physical for public good
injuries defamatory ridicule. faith,
(Article 33) imputations  Dissemin without
A. : ation to a any
Defamation a. It number of commen
 Defamat must be persons is ts or
ion is an defamat not remarks,
invasion of ory required, of any
the interest communicati judicial,
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
240
legislati the libelous false on the

ve or publication. represen false
other  In order tation to represen
official to escape the tation
proceedi liability, the plaintiff 
ngs defendant 2)The Half-truths
which may claim represen are likewise
are not that the tation included; it
of statements must be is actionable
confiden made are one of if the
tial privileged. fact withholding
nature, 3)The of that
or of any Two kinds of defenda which is not
stateme privileged nt must stated
nt, communication: know makes that
report, 1) Absolute that the which is
or ly represen stated
speech privilege tation is absolutely
delivere – Those false or false.
d in said which be 
proceedi are not reckless Misrepresent
ngs or of actionab about ation upon a
any le even whether mere matter
other if the it is of opinion is
act author false not an
perform acted in 4)The actionable
ed by bad defenda deceit.
public faith. nt must
officers 2) Qualifie have C.
in the dly acted on Physical
exercise privilege the false injuries
of their – not represen  Battery –
function actionab tation an
s. le unless 5)The intentional
found to defenda infliction of
have nt must a harmful or
 It is not been have offensive
sufficient made intended bodily
that the without that the contact;
offended good false bodily
party intentio represen contact is
recognized n or tation offensive if
himself as justifiab should it offends a
the person le be acted reasonable
attacked or motive. on person’s
defamed, it 6)The sense of
must be B. Fraud plaintiff dignity.
shown that  Element must  Assault –
at least a s of deceit have intentional
third person 1)The suffered conduct by
could defenda damage one person
identify him nt must as a directed at
as the have result of another
object of made acting which places
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
241
the latter in of their and may either

apprehensio duties. accessories. be
n of  It includes decreased or
immediate CIVIL LIABILITY restitution, increased
bodily harm ARISING FROM reparation depending
or offensive DELICT of damages on the
act.  Every person and presence of
 Includes criminally indemnificat mitigating or
bodily liable for a ion of aggravating
injuries felony is consequenti circumstanc
causing also civilly al damages. es.
death. liable.  The rule on
 Physical (Article 100 proximate Effect of Death
injuries RPC) cause in A. DEATH
which  The reason quasi-delict AFTER FINAL
resulted is because a cases is JUDGMENT:
because of crime has a applicable extinguishes
negligence dual to cases criminal
or character: involving liability of
imprudence as an civil liability the person
is not offense arising from liable but
included in against the delict. Art. will not
Article 33; State and 2202, NCC extinguish
they are against the the civil
already private Circumstances liability.
covered by person affecting Civil
Article 2176 injured by Liability B. DEATH
of the Civil it. 1. Justifying BEFORE
Code.  Dual circumstanc FINAL
character of es JUDGMENT:
3. Neglect of crimes  Defe GENERAL
duty by applies to ndant is free RULE: The
police cases from civil defendant is
officers governed by liability if relieved
(Article 34) special laws. justifying from both
 Subsidiary Example: circumstanc criminal and
liability of violation of es are civil liability
cities and the BP 22 properly arising from
municipaliti results in establishes. criminal
es, is criminal and 2. Exempting liability.
imposed so civil Circumstanc EXCEPTIO
that they liability. es N: In case
will exercise  There is civil  They of libel and
great care in liability do not erase physical
selecting even if the the civil injuries
conscientiou offense is a liability. wherein the
s and duly public 3. Mitigating plaintiff
qualified offense, like and initially
policemen in bigamy. Aggravating opted to
and exercise  Persons Circumstanc claim
supervision liable are es damages in
over them in the  Dam the criminal
the principal, ages to be proceeding
performance accomplice adjudicated can file
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
242
another case as a principal, to Imputed parents are

under the same extent Negligence made liable not
Article 33 of and in the same  A person only because of
the Civil manner as if is not only liable the negligent or
Code. they have for torts wrongful act of
performed the committed by the person for
Effect of Pardon wrongful act himself, but also whom they are
 Pardon does themselves. for torts responsible but
not erase  The committed by also because of
civil responsibility of others with their own
liability. two or more whom he has a negligence:
 While persons liable certain relation 1) Liability
pardon removes for quasi-delict or for whom he is
the existence of is solidary is imposed
guilt so that in (Article 2194 responsible. (Ar on the
the eyes of the Civil Code); they ticle 2180 Civil employe
law the offender are not liable Code) r
is deemed pro rata, they  Exercise because
innocent and are jointly and of diligence of a he failed
treated as severally liable good father of a to
though he never for the whole family to exercise
committed the amount. prevent damage due
offence, it does is a defense. diligenc
not operate to 2. Motor e in the
remove all the vehicle  Doctrine of selectio
effects of the mishaps Respondeat n or
previous  The owner is Superior – the supervisi
conviction. solidarily liable liability is on of
with the driver, strictly imputed, the
DEFENDANTS IN if the former, the employer is employe
TORT CASES who was in the liable not e
vehicle, could because of his 2) Parents
Concurrent have, by the use act or omission are
Negligence or of due diligence, but because of made
Acts prevented the the act or liable
1. Joint Tort- misfortune. omission of the because
feasors (Article 2184 employee; they
 A Civil Code) employer cannot failed to
ll the persons  Solidary escape liability exercise
who command, liability is by claiming that due
instigate, imposed on the he exercised due diligenc
promote, owner not diligence in the e
encourage, because of his selection or EXCEPTIO
advice, imputed liability supervision of N: Doctrine
countenance, but because his the employee. of
cooperate in, own omission is GENERAL respondeat
aid, or abet the a concurring RULE: Vicarious superior is
commission of a proximate cause liability in the applicable
tort, or who of the injury. Philippines is in:
approve of it not governed by 1) liability
after it is done, Vicarious the doctrine of of
if done for their Liability or respondeat employe
benefit; they Doctrine of superior; rs under
are each liable employers or Article
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
243
103 of s of authorit  The

the RPC their y, i.e., parents
2) liability minor guardian or
of a children . guardian
partners is the s can
hip for parental  The still be
the tort authorit liability held
committ y that is liable
ed by a they present even if
partner exercise only the
over both minor is
Persons them, under already
Vicariously except Art 2180 emancip
Liable: (Article for of the ated
2180 of the children NCC and provided
Civil Code) 18 to 21. Art 221 that he
1. The Father,  The of the is below
or in case of same Family 21 years
death or foreseab Code if of age.
incapacity, ility test the child
mother of is living  Parents
negligen in his and
 For damage ce parents’ other
caused by: should company persons
apply to . exercisin
a) minor parents g
children when parental
they are
 Parental
authorit authorit
sought y can
b) living in y is not
to be escape
their company the sole
held liability
basis of
liable by
 This has liability.
under proving
already been A
Art. that
modified by Art. teacher
2180, they
221 of the in
NCC observe
Family Code to charge is
still d all the
the extent that  The diligenc
the alternative liable
liability for the e of a
qualification of is not good
the liability of acts of
limited their father of
the father and to a family
the mother has students
parents, even if to
been removed. the prevent
the
same is minor damages
also student . (Art.
NOTES: imposed reaches 2180)
on those the age
 The exercisin of  The
basis of g majority burden
liability substitut . of proof
for the e and rests on
acts or special the
omission parental
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
244
parents d no liability when

and helpers an employee’s
persons conduct, act or 6. Schools,
exercisin b) acting omission is Teachers
g within beyond the and
parental the range of Administrat
authorit scope of employment, a ors
y. their minor deviation  For damage
assigned from the caused by:
tasks assigned task of a) pupils
2. Guardians an employee, and
 For damage c) even if however does students
caused by the not affect the or
a. minors or employe liability of an apprenti
incapacitated r is not employer. ces
persons engaged (Valenzuela vs. b) in their
b. under their in any CA, 253 SCRA custody
authority business 303) statutory basis:
c. living in or  It is a  if
their company industry defense that the s
employer t
3. Owners and exercised proper u
managers of diligence in the d
NOTES:
establishments selection and e
 For damage supervision of n
 Liability of negligent t
caused by:
the employer employee. i
a) their
can be s
employe
established by 5. State m
es
proving the  For damage i
existence of an caused by: n
b) in the employer- a) a special o
service employee agent r
of the relationship with b) not –
branches the actor and when the A
in which the latter damage r
they are caused the has been t
employe injury while caused by .
d, or performing his the 2
assigned task or official to 1
c) on the functions. whom the 9
occasion  The task done ,
of their vicarious properly F
function liability attaches pertains C
s only when the  if
 Public
tortuous officers who are student
conduct of the guilty of is no
4. Employers employees tortuous longer a
 For damages relates to or is conduct are minor –
cause by: in the course of personally liable Art.
his employment. for their 2180,
a) employe actions. Civil
es and  While the Code
househol employer incurs
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
245
NOTES: the his students. school

parents The school and and
 Applies and administrators within
also to those are not liable. its
teachers exercisin EXCEPTION: It premises
of g is only the head whether
academi substitut of the school, the
c e not the teacher semeste
instituti parental who is held r had
ons. authorit liable where the not yet
y are injury is caused begun or
 Liability
not free in a school of has
attaches
from arts and trade. already
to the
liability  The ended.
teacher-
because liability 
in-
Art. 219 of the The victim
charge.
of the teacher of
Family subsists negligen
 The Code whether ce is
school expressl the likewise
itself is y school is required
now provides academi to
solidaril that c or exercise
y liable they are non- due care
with the subsidiar academi in
teacher- ily c. avoiding
in- liable.  Liability injury to
charge. himself.
is
 Art. imposed
 The 2180 only if Other Persons
liability makes the Vicariously
extends teachers pupil is Liable:
to acts and already 1. Innkeepers
committ heads in the and
ed even liable custody Hotelkeepers
outside for acts of the  They are
the of teacher civilly liable for
school students or head. crimes
so long and The committed in
as it is apprenti student their
an ces is in the establishments
official whether custody in cases of
activity the of the violations of
of the latter school statutes by
school. are authoriti them, in default
minors es as of persons
 Whenev or not. longs as criminally liable.
er the he is (Article 102
school under Revised Penal
or GENERAL the Code)
teacher RULE: The control  They are
is being teacher-in- and subsidiarily
made charge is liable influenc liable for the
liable, for the acts of e of the restitution of
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
246
goods taken by  Liability is partnership but and regardless

robbery or theft entirely imputed against the of the state of
within their and the separate mind of the
houses from partnership properties of the actor at that
guests lodging cannot obviously wrongdoer. time.
therein, or for invoke diligence EXCEPTION:
payment of the in the selection Conjugal TYPES:
value thereof, and supervision partnership
provided that: of the partner. should be made 1. Animals
a. The liable:
innkeeper was 3. Spouses 1) When the GENERAL
notified in a. absolute profits have RULE: The
advance of the community of inured to the possessor of an
deposit of such property benefit of the animal or
goods within the  The partnership, or whoever may
inn; and absolute 2) If one of the make use of the
b. The guest community spouses same is
shall have property shall committed the responsible for
followed the be for liabilities tort while the damages
directions which incurred by performing a which it may
such innkeeper either spouses business or if cause although
or his by reason of the act was it may escape or
representative crime or quasi- supposed to be lost.
may have given delict in case of benefit the EXCEPTION:
with respect to absence or partnership. When the
the care and insufficiency of c. regime of damage was
vigilance over the exclusive separation of caused by force
the goods. property of the property majeure or by
debtor-spouse.  Each the person who
2. Partnership (Article 94 spouse is suffered the
 Partnership Family Code) damage.
or every partner  Payment responsible for (Article 2183
is liable for torts s shall be his/her separate Civil Code)
committed by considered obligation.
one of the advances to be NOTES:
partners acting deducted from
within the scope the share of the C. STRICT
of the firm  If the acts of
debtor spouse LIABILITY a third person
business, though upon liquidation  When the
they do not cannot be
of the person is made foreseen or
participate in, community. liable
ratify, or have prevented, then
b. conjugal independent of the situation is
knowledge of partnership of fault or
such torts. similar to that
gains negligence upon of force majeure
 Partners are submission of and the
liable as joint GENERAL proof of certain possessor is not
tort-feasors. RULE: Pecuniary facts specified liable.
 Vicarious indemni-ties by law. (Francisco,
liability is imposed upon NOTE: Strict Torts and
similar to the the husband or liability tort can Damages)
common law wife are not be committed  Art. 2183 is
rule on chargeable even if applicable
respondeat against the reasonable care whether the
superior. conjugal was exercised
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
247
animal is purely the presence or

domestic, accidental. 4. Nuisance absence of fault
domesticated,  If the or negligence.
or wild. mishap was due  Any act,
to the omission,  Every
employee’s own establishment, successive
2. Falling notorious business, owner or
objects negligence, or condition of possessor of
 The head of a voluntary act or property, or property who
family that lives drunkenness, anything else fails or refuses
in a building or a the employer which: to abate a
part thereof is shall not be nuisance in that
responsible for liable for a. Injures or property started
damages caused compensation. endangers the by a former
by things thrown  When the health or safety owner or
or falling from employee’s lack of others; possessor is
the same. of due care liable therefore
(Article 2193 contributed to in the same
b. Annoys or manner as the
Civil Code) his death or
offends the one who created
injury, the
senses; it. (Article 686
 The term compensation
“head of the shall be Civil Code)
equitably c. Shocks,
family” is not defies or
limited to the reduced. 5. Product
disregards liability by
owner of the  If the death
decency or manufacturers
building, and it or injury is due
morality;  Manufacture
may even to the
include the negligence of a rs and
lessee thereof. fellow-workman d. Obstructs or processors of
(Dingcong vs. the latter and interferes with foodstuffs,
Kanaan, 72 Phil the employer the free passage drinks, toilet
14) shall be of any public articles and
solidarily liable highway or similar goods
for street, or any shall be liable
compensation. body of water; for death or
3. Liability of or
 If a fellow- injuries caused
employers
worker’s by any noxious
intentional or e. Hinders or or harmful
 Article 1711 malicious act is impairs the user substances used,
of the NCC of property. although no
the only cause
imposes an (Article 694 contractual
of the death or
obligation on Civil Code) relation exists.
injury, the
owners of (Article 2187
employer shall
enterprises and  There is Civil Code)
not be
other employers strict liability on
answerable
to pay for the the part of the Other cases of
unless it should
death or injuries owner or liabil
be shown that
to their possessor of the ity
the latter did
employees. property where with
not exercise due
 Liability is diligence in the a nuisance is out
strict because it selection or found because fault:
exists even if supervision of he is obliged to 1. Proprietor of
the cause is the plaintiff’s abate the same a building or
fellow-worker. irrespective of structure, for
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
248
damages causing damage warranty in case

resulting from to another’s of failure of 5. Strict
its total or property was both the liability
partial collapse, not due to the manufacturer  Manufacture
if it should be fault or and distributor rs and
due to lack of negligence of to honor the processors of
necessary the defendant, warranty. foodstuffs,
repairs. . the latter shall  Privity of drinks, toilet
2. Breach of be liable for contract is not articles, and
implied indemnity if necessary. similar goods,
warranties. through the act shall be liable
3. Consumer or event he was 3. Negligence for death or
Act (R.A. 7394) – benefited. (Art.  In product injuries caused
any Filipino or 23 Civil Code) liability law, by any noxious
foreign certain or harmful
manufacturer, standards are substances used
producer and already imposed although no
importer, by special laws, contractual
independently rules and relation exists.
of fault shall be PRODUCT AND regulations of (Article 2187
liable for SERVICE proper Civil Code)
redress for LIABILITY government
damages caused agencies;  Privity of
to consumers by Alternative certain acts or contract is not
defects resulting theories on omissions are required.
from: basis of liability expressly  It does not
a. design; 1. Fraud or prohibited by preclude an
b. manufac misrepresentat the statutes action based on
ture; ion thereby making negligence
c. construc  Not all violation thereof (quasi-delict) for
tion; expression of negligence per the same act of
d. assembl opinion are se. using noxious or
y and actionable  It is harmful
erection; misrepresentatio negligence per substances.
e. formulas ns if they are se if
and handling established to manufacturer
and making be inaccurate. manufactured
up; or
products which  Article 97
f. presenta 2. Warranties do not comply and 99 of the
tion or  The with the safety Consumer Act
packing of Consumer Act standards imposes liability
their recognizes that promulgated by on defective
products as the provisions appropriate products and
well as for of the Civil Code government services upon
the on conditions agencies. manufacturers
insufficient and warranties
or independent of
shall govern all 4. Delict fault.
inadequate contracts of sale
information
 The liability  Knowledge
with conditions may be based on
on the use of the
and warranties. criminal negli-
and hazards manufacturer is
 Retailer gence under the not important;
thereof.
shall be RPC or violation the focus is on
4. Even when
subsidiarily of any special the condition of
an act or event
liable under the law.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
249
the product and  Requisites: occur because of liable for all

not on the The plaintiff the alleged act natural and
conduct of the should allege of interference; probable
manufacturer or and prove that: No action can be consequence
seller. 1) The maintained if s of his act
product was the contract is or omission,
 DEFENSES: defective; void. whether the
A. The 2) The  Malice is not same is
manufacturer, product was essential. forseen or
builder, manufacture  Elements of unforeseen.
producer, or d by the privilege to 2)
importer shall defendant; interfere If in good
not be liable 3) The 1)The faith:
when it defective defendant’s defandant is
evidences: product was purpose is a liable only
1) T the cause of justifiable for
hat it did his injury. one, and consequence
not place  4 KINDS OF 2)The s that can
the product DEFECTIVE actors be foreseen.
on the PRODUCTS employ no
market 1. manufac means of 2. Interferenc
2) T turing defect fraud or e with
hat although 2. design deception prospective
it did place defect which are advantage
the product 3. presenta regarded as  It is a tort
on the tion defect unfair. committed when
market such 4. absence  Extent of there is no
product had of appropriate Liability: contract yet and
no defect warning A. Rule in the defendant is
3) T Daywalt vs. La only being sued
hat the BUSINESS Corporation for inducing
consumer of TORTS 39PHIL587 another not to
third party 1. Interferenc  enter into a
is solely at e of contracts Defendant contract.
fault.  Elements: cannot be
(Article 97 a. existence held liable 3. Unfair
Consumer of a valid for more competition.
Act) contract than the  Unfair
B. The supplier b. knowledge amount for Competition in
of the services on the part of which the agricultural,
shall not be held the third contracting commercial, or
liable when it is person of the party who industrial
proven: existence of was induced enterprises, or
1) That the contract to break the in labor, through
there is no c. interferen contract can the use of force,
defect in the ce of the third be held intimidation ,
service rendered person liable. deceit,
2) That the without legal B. Rule under machination or
consumer of justification. Article 2201 and any unjust or
third party is  The 2202 Civil Code oppressive or
solely at fault. 1) highhanded
existence of a
(Article 99 If in bad method shall
contract is
Consumer Act) faith: give rise to a
necessary and
the breach must defendant is right of action
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
250
by a person who  Prescriptive physical hurt or  Proof of

thereby suffers Period: Action injury, but for pecuniary
damage. must be brought as long as no loss is
(Article 27 Civil within 2 years legal injury or necessary to
Code) after discovery wrong has been successfully
 CASES of facts done, there is recover
INCLUDED: constituting the no liability. actual
a. passing cause of action damages
off and and within 5 yrs from the
disparag after such cause defendant.
ement of action  There is no No proof of
of accrued. liability even if pecuniary
products there is damage loss is
b. interfere II. DAMAGES because there necessary in
nce was no injury. case of
c. misappr DAMAGE moral,
opriation  The nominal,
d. monopol detriment, temperate,
ies and injury or loss  There can liquidated or
predatory which are be damage exemplary
pricing occasioned by without injury. damages.
reason of fault  The
4. Securities of another in  In order that assessment
Related Torts the property or a plaintiff may of such
 Kinds person. maintain an damages,
a. Fraudule action for the except
nt DAMAGES injuries of which liquidated
Transactions  The he complains, ones, is left
b. Misstate pecuniary he must to the
ments or compensation, establish that discretion of
Omission of recompense or such injuries the court
statement of satisfaction for resulted from a according to
a material an injury breach of duty the
fact sustained or as which the circumstanc
required to otherwise defendant owed es of each
be stated expressed, the to the plaintiff. case.
 Defendants pecuniary
are free from consequences Injury Damage Kinds of
liability if they which the law Legal Loss, hurt damages
can prove that invasion of or harm (MANTLE)
imposes for the
a legal which
at the time of breach of some 1. Actual or
right results
the acquisition duty or violation from the Compensato
the plaintiff of some rights. injury ry
knew of the 2. Moral
untrue DAMNUM 3. Nominal
statement or if ABSQUE NOTES: 4. Temperate
he was aware of INJURIA  A complaint or moderate
the falsity. (Damage for damages 5. Liquidated
 Extent of Without Injury) is a personal 6. Exemplary
Damages: Not action. or corrective
exceeding triple (Baritua vs.
 A person
CA, 267
the amount of A. ACTUAL OR
may have SCRA 331)
the transaction. COMPENSATORY
suffered
DAMAGES
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
251
 Comprehend business  To recover creation of

s not only standing damages, such
the value of or the amount earnings and
the loss commer of loss must less living or
suffered but cial not only be other
also that of credit. capable of incidental
the profits proof but expenses.
which the  In crimes must
obligee and quasi- actually be Loss of profits
failed to delict, the proven.  May be
obtain. defendant  Uncertainty determined
 Classificatio shall be as to the by
n: liable for all precise considering
1. Dano damages amount is the average
emergen which are not profit for
te – loss the natural necessarily the
of what and fatal. preceding
a person probable years
already consequence LOSS OF multiplied
possesse s of the act EARNING by the
s and omission CAPACITY: number of
2. Lucro complained  Variables years during
cessante of. It is not considered which the
– failure necessary are: business was
to that such 1. life affected by
receive damages expecta the wrongful
as a have been ncy act or
benefit foreseen or 2. net breach.
that could have income/
would reasonably earnings Attorney’s fees
have foreseen by  They are
pertaine the Formula: actual
d to him defendant. {2/3 x (80–age of damages. It
NOTE: The (Article death)} x mo. is due to the
latter type 2202 Civil Earnings x 12 plaintiff and
includes: Code) not to the
1. Loss  The amount counsel.
or should be 2  Plaintiff
impairm that which NOTE: must allege
ent of would put  Life the basis of
earning plaintiff in expectancy his claim for
capacity the same is computed attorney’s
in cases position as as follows: fees in the
of he would { 2/3 x (80- complaint;
tempora have been if age at the basis
ry or he had not death) } should be
permane sustained  Net earnings one of the
nt the wrong is the total 11 cases
personal for which he of the specified in
injury. is now earnings less Article 2208
2. Injur getting his expenses of the Civil
y to the compensatio necessary Code.
plaintiff’ n or for the
s reparation. Interests
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
252
 Award of e, a- at
interest in the judi the
the concept inter cial discr
of actual est dem etio
and due and n of
compensator shall unde the
y damages itsel r cour
actual f and t at
damages. earn subj the
 The rate of legal ect rate
interest, as inter to of
well as the est the 6%
accrual from prov per
thereof is the ision annu
imposed as time s of m.
follows: it is Artic  No
1. When judi le inter
the ciall 1169 est
obligatio y of shall
n is dem the be
breache ande Civil adju
d and it d. Cod dged
consist b. In e. on
of the 2. When unli
payment abse the quid
of sum nce obligatio ated
of of n, not clai
money, stipu constitut ms
i.e., a latio ing a or
loan or n, loan or dam
forbeara the forbeara ages
nce of rate nce or ,
money: of money, exce
a. The inter is pt
inter est breache whe
est shall d: n or
due be  An until
shou 12% inter dem
ld per est and
be annu on can
that m to the be
whic be amo esta
h com unt blish
may pute of ed
have d dam with
been from ages reas
stipu defa to onab
late ult, be le
d in i.e., awar cert
writi from ded aint
ng; judi may y.
furt cial be  Whe
her or impo re
mor extr sed the
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
253
dem such anxiety, the

and finality besmirched claimant;
is until its reputation, 2. There must
esta satisfact wounded be a
blish ion. feelings, culpable act
ed moral shock, or omission.;
with Doctrine of social 3. Such act or
reas Avoidable humiliation, omission is
onab Consequences and similar the
le  A party injury. proximate
cert cannot  No proof of cause of the
aint recover pecuniary injury;
y, damages loss is 4. The
the flowing from necessary. damages is
inter consequence GENERAL predicated
est s which the RULE: The on the cases
shall party could plaintiff must cited in
begi reasonably allege and Art.2219.
n to have prove:
run avoided. 1. The NOTE: The
from  It has a factual award of moral
the reasonable basis for damages cannot
time corollary: a moral be granted in
the person who damages favor of a
clai reasonably ; and corporation
m is attempts to 2. Its because, being
mad minimize his causal an artificial
e damages can relation person, it has no
judi recover the to the feelings, no
ciall expenses defenda emotions, no
y or that he nt’s act senses. It cannot
extr incurred. EXCEPTION: therefore
ajud Moral damages experience
iciall Doctrine of may be awarded physical
y. Contributoryto the victim in suffering and
Avoidable
3. When the Negligence criminal mental anguish
Consequences
judgmenActs of the Plaintiff’s act proceedings
or which can be
t of the
plaintiff occur omission occurs without the experienced
court after the act or before or at the need for only by one
awardinomission of the time of the act or pleading of having a nervous
g the
defendant omission of theproof of the system.
sum of defendant basis thereof.
money
becomes Requisites for
final and award of moral
B. MORAL
executor damages:
DAMAGES
y, the 1. There must
rate of  Includes be an injury C. NOMINAL
legal physical DAMAGES
whether
interest suffering,  Nominal
physical,
shall be mental mental or damages are
12% per anguish, psychologica adjudicated
annum fright, l, clearly in order that
from serious sustained by a right of
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
254
the plaintiff,  Nominal damages can addition to

which has damages and should compensatory
been cannot co- be awarded damages and
violated or exist with on top of Imposed only
invaded by actual or actual or after the
the compensator compensator claimants right
defendant, y damages. y damages; to them has
may be in such cases been
vindicated D. there is no established;
or TEMPERATE OR incompatibil 2. They cannot
recognized, MODERATE ity between be recovered as
and not for DAMAGES actual and a matter of
the purpose  These are temperate right, their
of damages, damages. determination
indemnifying which are depending upon
the plaintiff more than E. LIQUIDATED the amount of
for any loss nominal but DAMAGES compensatory
suffered by less than  Those damages that
him. compensator agreed upon may be
(Article2221 y, and may by the awarded;
Civil Code) be parties in a 3. The act
 Small sums recovered contract, to must be
fixed by the when the be paid in accompanied by
court court finds case of bad faith or
without that some breach done in wanton,
regard to pecuniary thereof. fraudulent,
the extent loss has oppressive or
of the harm been malevolent
done to the suffered but manner.
injured its amount
party. cannot be
 Law proved with
presumes certainty. F. EXEMPLARY
damage (Article OR CORRECTIVE
although 2224 Civil DAMAGES
actual or Code)
compensator  In cases  Imposed by
y damages where the way of example
are not resulting or correction for
proven. injury might the public good,
 They are be in addition to
damages in continuing the moral,
name only and possible temperate,
and are future liquidated or
allowed complication compensatory
simply in s directly damages.
recognition arising from
of a the injury,  Requisites
technical while for the award
injury based certain to of exemplary
on a occur are damages:
violation of difficult to 1. They are
a legal right. predict, imposed by way
temperate of example in
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),

Torts and Damages: San Beda College of Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torts and Damages: San Beda College of Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Beda College of Law

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

I. TORTS tortious conduct  The omission independent

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

 Whoever by  If not then before him. nature of his act

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

emergency ordinary necessary 2. Physical

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

only to be considered to  In A. VIOLATION

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

establishes promulgated by establish Gross

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

the owner is use is Requisites of its neighbors

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

discriminate is considered,  The b. Doctrine of

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

c. State of a manner as to maintaining the the Labor

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

may be held action based on  It negligence.

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

physician damages. recover

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

of the negligence s the humanized

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

b. He must the waiver is ii. Contractual b) W

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

voluntarily  An action defense in independent

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

injury are defendant’s motion of the

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

produce the Consequenc forces, which Cause and

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

negatives time the pre-emptive in together with

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

negligence of his negligence 1. If the consequences

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

agency c. The act is or abuse of lust without

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

and public whatever is personal 

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

loss of the customs and  Elements:  Acquittal

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

 Under expectation death of the another’s

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

for any person involves his the violation public

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

d biography  isThe gist of

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

legislati the libelous false on the

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

the latter in of their and may either

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

another case as a principal, to Imputed parents are

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

103 of s of authorit  The

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

parents d no liability when

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW

NOTES: the his students. school