MA. Teresa Cuadra v.

Monfort - right eye blind, no basis of negligence on the part of parents absent

Vicarious Liability
When the act or omission is that of one person for whom another is responsible, the latter then
becomes himself liable under Article 2180. (Described also here, vicarious liability although primary)

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1970/sep1970/gr_24101_1970.html

F Cuadra and Monfort were classmates in Mabini Elem. School Bacolod City, while tasked to
weed out grass/pants at school Monfort accidentally poked Cuadra’s eye. (Attempting to
scare her with an earthworm, but actually was a hair band. Cuadra’s right eye went blind
even after 2 successful operations. Monfort parents file an action based on Quasi-Delict against
parents of Cuadra.

CFI: favor of plaintiff. Cuadras elevated it to SC.

I Whether Monfort’s parents can be held liable for the negligence of their child who then
was at school, and not under their supervision.
R No, the decision appealed from was reversed.

Ratio:

- 2176 - Quasi Delict - basis of the liability imposed is negligence accompanying the act or
omission, there being no willfulness or intent to cause damage thereby.

- 2180 - Vicarious Liability - basis of the liability imposed is Art. 2176, which here is presumed
prima facie, hence can be rebutted by proving that the defense observed all the diligence of a
good father of a family to prevent damage.

- Burden of proof rests on the defendant.

The court described how to prove due diligence

- there is no meticulously calibrated measure applicable

- The law simply implies a consideration of the attendant circumstances in individual cases to
determine by the exercise of such diligence, DAMAGE COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED.

Application:
- here there is nothing which can be inferred from that the Monfort parents could have
prevented the damage by the exercise of due care, or that he was in any way remiss in the
exercise of his parental authority in failing to foresee such damage, nor the act which caused it.

P ART. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or
negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-
existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by
provisions of this Chapter.

ART 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or
omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible. The father and, in case of
his death or incapacity are responsible for the damages caused by the minor children who live in
their company. xxx xxx xxx The responsibility treated of in this Article shall cease when the
persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to
prevent damage.

Page 53 of 60