1 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

Compensation (which may have different purposes)

TORTS REVIEWER o
 Corrective justice
(Notes based on An Analysis of Philippine Law and Jurisprudence on Torts
 Economic reasons
and Quasi-Delicts by Prof. Rommel J. Casis, 2012 edition; also based on
 Deterrent to harmful conduct
Prof. Edgardo Carlo L. Vistan’s discussions and syllabus. For academic
purposes only. Caveat emptor.) ELEMENTS OF TORT:

THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 1. Duty

 Tort: from Latin “tortus” (twisted or crooked)
o Developed as a common law concept
o Yet to obtain a universally accepted definition.
QUASI-DELICTS:
TORT UNDER PHILIPPINE LAW
 The term “tort” was rejected in favor of the term “quasi-delict” by
the Code Commission
o Tort in Anglo-American jurisprudence also included
intentional criminal acts
 No mention in the Civil Code
 Exact boundaries are unclear.
 Note: every quasi-delict is a tort, but not every tort is a quasi-
delict
 Can be considered as a classification of actions, which generally
give rise to an action for damages
o Quasi-delict (Arts. 2176, 2180
o Strict liability tort (Arts. 1711, 1723, 2183, 2187, 2189-
2193)
o Human relations torts (Arts. 19-21, 26)
o Independent civil actions (Arts. 32-35)
PURPOSE OF TORT LAW:
 Compensation of individuals for losses which they have suffered
within the scope of their legally recognized interests
2. Breach
3. Injury
4. Proximate causation
 One of the five sources of obligation in Art. 1157
 Defined by Art. 2176:
o 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 the provisions of this Chapter.
 CASIS: Taking all the cases into consideration along with the
intent [of the] framers of the Civil Code, it is more in accord with
sound doctrine to rule that a quasi-delict is committed by
negligence and without willful intent to injure although the act
may be voluntary.
 Success of the quasi-delict action does not depend upon the
success of the criminal action.
 Compared to delicts:
o Private concern (as opposed to crimes which are of public
interest)
o Civil Code: indemnification
o Broader than delicts
2 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

ELEMENTS OF QUASI-DELICT (ART. 2176) o Aquiliana: Due diligence in selection and supervision of
employee
1. Act or omission
o Contractual: Due diligence in selection, supervision
2. Damage to another
CANNOT BE RAISED.
3. Fault or negligence
4. No pre-existing contractual relation NEGLIGENCE
ELEMENTS OF QUASI-DELICT (JURISPRUDENCE) HOW TO DETERMINE IF SOMEONE IS NEGLIGENT (ART. 1173
1. Damage to the plaintiff CC): (Check the following)
2. Negligence, by act or omission, of the defendant, or by some 1. Diligence required of the actor under the circumstances
other person for whose act the defendant must respond 2. WON actor performed the diligence required under the
3. Connection of cause and effect between the fault or negligence of circumstances
the defendant and the damage incurred by the plaintiff a. Nature of the obligation
*CASIS: To be more precise, the element should be injury instead of b. Circumstances of the persons, of the time, and of the
damage (There can be damage without injury – no damages can be place (PTP)
awarded in such case). DEGREES OF NEGLIGENCE:
CULPA CONTRACTUAL V. CULPA AQUILIANA 1. Slight
 Source a. “Failure to use great care”
o Aquiliana: wrongful or negligent act or omission itself b. “absence of that degree of care and vigilance which
which creates the vinculum persons of extraordinary prudence and foresight are
o Contractual: vinculum exists independently of the breach accustomed to use”
of the voluntary duty assumed by the parties when 2. Ordinary
entering into the contractual relation a. “Failure to use ordinary care”
 Burden of Proof (What is sufficient?) 3. Gross
o Aquiliana: plaintiff must prove negligence a. “Failure to even use slight care”
o Contractual: prove existence of the contract and its non- b. “Very great negligence, or want of even slight or scant
performance care”
 Applicability of Doctrine of Proximate Cause c. “Failure to exercise even that care which [a] careless
o Aquiliana: YES person would use”
o Contractual: NO
 Defense of Employer for Employee’s Negligence
3 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
STANDARDS OF CONDUCT:
 Civil law: GR: “Good father of a family”
o E: if otherwise provided
 Special circumstances
o Greater diligence on the part of drivers of motor vehicles
in case of collision with bicycles
 Art. 2185 not applicable to non-motorized vehicles
(see Anonuevo v. CA)
o Pacis v. Morales: “a business dealing with dangerous
weapons requires the exercise of a higher degree of
care.”
 Children
o <9 years old: conclusively presumed incapable of
contributory negligence
o 9 ≤ x < 15: rebuttable presumption of incapacity for
negligence
o See Taylor v. Manila Electric: 15 y.o. Taylor was found to
be more mature mentally and physically when compared
to an average boy of his age. Thus, his own act was
considered to be the proximate and principal cause of his
injury.
 Experts
o Understood as holding himself out to the public as
possessing the degree of skill commonly possessed by
others in the same employment
o Higher standard of diligence required of experts
 Pharmacists
o Highest degree of care and diligence
 Medical Professionals
o Same level of care that any other reasonably competent
doctor would use to treat the condition under the same
circumstance
PRESUMPTIONS OF NEGLIGENCE
MOTOR VEHICLE MISHAPS
 Art. 2184: Presumed negligent if owner could have prevented
misfortune
o Driver disputably presumed negligent if found guilty of
reckless driving or violating traffic regulations at least
twice within the next preceding 2 months
o If owner not in vehicle: Art. 2180 is applicable
 Art. 2185: Presumed negligent if the driver was violating any
traffic regulation at the time of the mishap
o There must be a causal connection between the injury
and the violation.
o The claimant must prove that the negligence was the
proximate cause to be able to claim damages.
 Violation of traffic regulation is not enough.
 Art. 2185 is NOT applicable to non-motorized vehicles (Anonuevo
v. CA).
POSSESSION OF DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND SUBSTANCES
 Defendant presumed negligent if death or injury results from
possession of dangerous weapons or substances (e.g. firearms
and poison)
 Presumption not applicable if indispensable to business
COMMON CARRIERS
 Presumption of negligence if goods transported are lost,
destroyed, or deteriorated unless extraordinary diligence is proven
RES IPSA LOQUITUR
 “The thing or the transaction speaks for itself.”
4 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

 Elements: o Contributed to INJURY ONLY

o The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur
FORTUITOUS EVENT
unless someone is negligent
o The accident is caused by an instrumentality within the
exclusive control of the person sought to be made liable
o The possibility of contributing conduct, which would make
the plaintiff responsible, is eliminated.
 Can only be invoked if direct evidence of negligence or direct
cause of the injury is absent and not readily available
 Procedural rule; does NOT dispense with the requirement of proof
of culpable negligence
o Merely determines and regulates what shall be prima facie
evidence and facilitates the burden of plaintiff of proving a
breach of the duty of due care.
 Ramos v. CA: The Court used res ipsa loquitur to allow the
testimony of a non-expert.
 *Expert testimony – why required in medical cases:
o To establish standard of care
o To prove breach of duty
o To prove proximate causation
o NOTE: Applicable only to matters clearly within the
domain of medical science.
DEFENSES AGAINST THE CHARGE OF NEGLIGENCE
PLAINTIFF’S NEGLIGENCE IS THE PROXIMATE CAUSE
 Art. 2179: When plaintiff’s own negligence is immediate and
proximate cause of injury – cannot recover damages
o Contributed to PRINCIPAL OCCURRENCE PLAINTIFF’S ASSUMPTION OF RISK
 Art. 1174 (Definition)
o Could not be foreseen; or
o Foreseen but inevitable
 GR: No one is responsible for FE
 E to GR:
o Cases expressly specified by law
o Declared by stipulation
o Nature of the obligation requires assumption of risk
 Elements:
o Cause of unforeseen and unexpected occurrence must be
independent of human will
o It must be impossible to foresee the event which
constitutes the caso fortuito, or if it can be foreseen, it
must be impossible to avoid
o Occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for
the debtor to fulfill his obligation in a normal manner
o Obligor must be free from any participation in the
aggravation of the injury resulting to the creditor
 Three-step analysis according to Casis:
o Identify FE
o Does the circumstance fall under any of the three
exceptions under Art. 1174?
o Are all the essential requisites of a fortuitous event
present?

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF  When not applicable:

o When an emergency exists
 Arts. 2179, 2214: Damages will be MITIGATED o The life or property of another is in peril
5 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

o When a person seeks to rescue his endangered property Recovery may be had against any of the actors responsible for
any of the causes, provided that each cause is an efficient
PRESCRIPTION
cause.
 Art. 1146  Should be distinguished from contributory negligence – “A
o Actions based on quasi-delict must be instituted within concurrent cause contributes to the accident itself while
four years from the time when the last element occurs or contributory negligence contributes to injury”
takes place (the time of the commission of an act or i. Personal note: Perhaps “principal occurrence” is more
omission violative of the right of the plaintiff) appropriate.
3. REMOTE
THE CAUSE  A cause which would have been a proximate cause had there
been no efficient intervening cause after it and prior to the
A. DIFFERENT CATEGORIES
injury
1. PROXIMATE
 Furnished a condition or gave rise to an occasion which made
 Art. 2176 requires that the act or omission of the defendant be
the injury possible
the cause of the injury.
4. INTERVENING
o Jurisprudence requires that the injured party prove a
 Important Q: Is defendant liable despite the presence of an
connection of cause and effect between the fault or
intervening cause?
negligence of the defendant and the injury to the plaintiff
i. WON intervention of later cause is a significant part of
o Cause: negligence of defendant
the risk involved in the defendant’s conduct, or is so
Effect: injury to plaintiff
reasonably connected with it that the responsibility
 Proximate cause
should not be terminated
o Cause without which the injury would not have occurred
ii. Liable if succeeding negligent act is a foreseeable
o Results in injury as foreseeable and natural and probable
intervening cause
consequence
1. See: Phoenix Construction v. IAC
 Vda. de Bataclan v. Medina’s definition (short definition):
iii. Not liable if defendant could not foresee any danger
o That cause, which in natural and continuous sequence,
of direct injury or any risk from an intervening cause.
unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the
injury, and without which the result would not have
B. TESTS TO DETERMINE PROXIMATE CAUSE
occurred
1. But For
2. CONCURRENT
a. In common law, the preeminent test appears to be the
 The existence of another efficient cause does not make a
“but for” test which states that: An act or omission is not
cause less proximate.
6 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

regarded as a cause of an event if the particular event ii. As a manner of establishing the liability of
would have occurred without it defendant: Where both parties are negligent, but
2. Sufficient Link the negligent act of one is appreciably later in
a. Sufficient link between the act or omission and the time than that of the other, or when it is
damage or injury impossible to determine whose fault or negligence
b. Must not be remote or far-fetched should be attributed to the incident, the one who
c. Not required to show that injury would not have occurred had the last clear chance to avoid the impending
without act or omission complained of harm and failed to do so is chargeable with the
3. Substantial Factor consequences thereof
a. If the actor’s conduct is a substantial factor in bringing b. Not explicitly employed by court as a test for proximate
about harm to another, the fact that the actor neither cause
foresaw nor should have foreseen the extent of the harm c. It would seem that the doctrine’s place in the jurisdiction
or the manner in which it occurred does not prevent him is, at best, a test for proximate cause
from being liable.
4. Mixed Considerations (of logic, common sense, policy, and PERSONS VICARIOUSLY LIABLE
precedent)
ART. 2180 PROVIDES (NOTE: But see FC provisions, etc. for some of
a. May be an admission that there is really no test to
the cases here.):
determine proximate cause and the Court can base the
determination on anything it sees fit Person Vicariously Actor
5. Cause v. Condition Liable
a. WON the negligent act merely furnished a condition which Father, but in case Minor children who
made the injury possible but was not its cause of death or live in their company
b. Court noted that the distinction has already been “almost incapacity, the
entirely discredited” mother
6. Last Clear Chance  See Art. 221
a. Two ways jurisprudence states the doctrine FC: both
i. As to right of plaintiff to recover: Antecedent parents now
negligence of plaintiff does not preclude him from liable, not
recovering damages caused by the supervening father
negligence of the defendant, who had the last fair primarily
chance to prevent the impending harm by the  Minor must
exercise of due diligence be under
7 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

parent’s A. PERSONS EXERCISING PARENTAL AUTHORITY

parental
1. PARENTS
authority
Guardians Minors or  Based on presumption of negligence on their part if their child
incapacitated under parental authority causes injury
persons who are o Negligent in performance of legal, natural duty to
under their authority supervise the child
and live in their  See Art. 221 FC: both parents now liable, not father primarily
company o Also added that minor must be under parent’s parental
Owners and Employees in the authority
managers of an service of the  Required: diligence of a good father of a family in instruction and
establishment or branches in which supervision of the child
enterprise the latter are  See Tamargo v. CA. Court held that adoption did not retroact to
employed or on the make adoptive parents liable when the child was not subject to
occasion of their their control during the incident.
functions
2. GUARDIANS
Employers Employees and
household helpers  Minors or incapacitated persons
acting within the o Under their authority
scope of their o Live in their company
assigned tasks, even
though the former 3. OTHER PERSONS EXERCISING PARENTAL AUTHORITY
are not engaged in  Art. 221 FC: Persons exercising parental authority are civilly liable
any business or for injuries and damages caused by the acts or omissions of their
industry minor children living in their company and under their parental
State Special agent authority, subject to the appropriate defenses provided by law
Teachers or heads Pupils or students or  Art. 216 FC: in default of parents or a judicially appointed
of establishments of apprentices, so long guardian, the following exercise substitute parental authority over
arts and trades as they remain in the child in the order indicated:
their custody o Surviving grandparent
o Oldest brother or sister, over 21, unless unfit or
disqualified
8 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
o Child’s actual custodian, over 21, unless unfit or
disqualified
 Art. 217 FC: Foundlings, abandoned, neglected or abused children
and other children similarly situated –
o Summary judicial proceedings
 Heads of children’s homes, orphanages, and
similar institutions duly accredited by the proper
gov’t agency
B. TEACHERS AND SCHOOLS
 Teachers (academic in nature), heads of establishments of arts
and trades (establishments of arts and trades) – (See Amadora v.
CA.)
o They stand in loco parentis and are called upon to
“exercise reasonable supervision over the conduct of the
child.
 Applies to all schools, academic or non-academic
 “So long as they remain in their custody”
o Protective and supervisory custody that the school and
heads and teachers exercise over the pupils and students
as long as they are in attendance in the school
o Including recess.
o Not required that student lives and boards in the school
 Teacher-in-charge: one designated by the dead, principal, or other
administrative superior to exercise supervision over the pupils in
the specific classes or sections to which they are assigned
 Art. 218 FC: Special parental authority over the minor child while
under their supervision, instruction, or custody of the school,
school administrators, teachers, or the individual, entity, or
institution engaged in child care
o See St. Mary’s Academy v. Carpitanos: school was not
liable for death of student (15 y.o. was allowed to drive
jeep for an enrollment drive) since there was no finding
that the act or omission considered as negligent was the
proximate cause of the injury. Negligence must have a
causal connection to the accident.
C. OWNERS OR MANAGERS OF ESTABLISHMENTS/EMPLOYERS
 NOT based on respondeat superior (where the master is liable in
every case and unconditionally.)
 Distinguishing between 4th and 5th par., Art. 2180 (Castilex v.
Vasquez):
A. 4th par.: covers negligent act of employees committed
either in the service of the branches or on the occasion of
their functions
B. 5th par.: negligent acts of employees acting within scope
of their assigned tasks
 “expansion of the former in both employer
coverage and acts included”
 Casis: effect of such interpretation makes 4th par.
redundant and useless.
 WHEN APPLICABLE (gives rise to disputable presumption that
employer is negligent):
A. ER-EE Relationship
 Cannot be assumed; burden of proof is on
plaintiff
 Right of control not sufficient without ER-EE
relationship
 Apply the four-fold test! (selection, payment of
wages, dismissal, control)
B. Within the scope of assigned tasks
 Time: when quasi-delict was committed
 Need not prove that employee was not acting
within the scope of his assigned tasks – enough
9 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
to deny that his employee was acting within the
scope of his duties
 “within the scope of their assigned tasks”: As per
jurisprudence, includes any act done by an
employee in furtherance of the interests of the
employer or for the account of the employer at
the time of the infliction of the injury or damage
 DEFENSES/REBUTTAL OF PRESUMPTION
A. Presentation of adequate and convincing proof that he
exercised care and diligence in the selection and
supervision of his employees.
B. Selection – examine employee as to qualifications,
experience, and service records
C. Supervision – depends upon the circumstances of
employment
 Diligent supervision of its employee during the
performance of the latter’s assigned tasks is
enough.
 Jurisprudence:
 Formulate standard operating procedures,
suitable rules and regulations, issuance of
proper instructions;
 Monitor implementation;
 Impose disciplinary measures for their
breach
D. THE STATE
 Art. 2180: when it acts through a special agent, but NOT when
official to whom the task done properly pertains caused the
damage
 IF State agent discharging the functions of his office causes the
injury to the private individual, there is no presumption of
negligence on the part of the State
o Official functions: State is presumed to be diligent.
 State agent definition, from a Spanish SC case: one who receives
a definite and fixed order or commission, foreign to the exercise of
the duties of his office if he is a special official
o Case added that this concept did NOT apply to any
executive agent who is “an employee of the active
administration and who in his own responsibility performs
the functions inherent in and naturally pertain to his office
and which are regulated by law and the regulations”
 More recent jurisprudence: If public official, must not only be
specially commissioned to do a particular task, but such task must
be foreign to said official’s usual gov’t functions
o If not public official and commissioned to perform non-
governmental functions – State assumes role of
ORDINARY EMPLOYER
o If private individual commissioned for a special
governmental task, it is ACTING THROUGH A SPECIAL
AGENT within the meaning of the provision
o Governmental – can be performed only by the gov’t
o Proprietary/Non-governmental – service which might as
well be provided by a private corporation, and particularly
when it collects revenues from it
o CASIS: Art. 2180 does not state that it only applies in
situations where the agent is performing governmental
functions
 Simpler to apply if the nature of the functions
performed by agent is not considered but only
whether the agent is “special”
o Fontanilla v. Maliaman: Liability of state (2 aspects –
public and governmental aspects (tortuous acts of state
special agents); private or business aspects (liable as
ordinary employer))
10 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
PERSONS SPECIFICALLY LIABLE
 Sir Vistan: Here, concern is proving the elements of the story.
A. POSSESSOR OR USER OF ANIMALS
 Possessor OR user of an animal
o Even if the animal escapes
 Liability ceases if (only two defenses):
o damage comes from force majeure
o fault of the person who suffered damage
 Vestil v. IAC: Even if Vestils claim to not be the owners of the dog,
they were in possession of it. Furthermore, the child (who was 3)
is conclusively presumed incapable of negligence. Thus, they
could not allege that it was the child’s fault in order to avoid
liability. It doesn’t matter if the dog is tame since even tame ones
are covered by the provision.
 Afialde v. Hisole: Injured caretaker of animal cannot use Art. 2183
against the owner.
B. OWNER OF MOTOR VEHICLES
 Art. 2184: Owner solidarily liable with his driver if the former, who
was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of due diligence,
prevented the misfortune.
 Caedo v. Yu Khe Thai: Owner was not liable since there was no
reason for him to be in any special state of alert. He had reason to
rely on the skill and experience of his driver.
 Casis notes some difficulty: how can claimant prove that owner
could’ve prevented the accident through due diligence?
C. PROVINCES, CITIES, AND MUNICIPALITIES
 Art. 2189: Liable for damages for the death of, or injuries suffered
by, any person by reason of the defective condition of roads,
streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works under
their control or supervision.
o Important: control or supervision!
o NOTE: defense of due diligence or even force majeure
absent from this provision!
D. PROPRIETORS OF BUILDINGS
 Art. 2190: Responsible for injury resulting from building or
structure’s total or partial collapse, if it should be due to a lack of
necessary repairs.
o Absent: requirement of proving negligence!
o STRICT LIABILITY PROVISION
 Art. 2191: Also responsible for injury caused by:
o Explosion of machinery which has not been taken care of
with due diligence, and the inflammation of explosive
substances which have not been kept in a safe and
adequate place;
o Excessive smoke, which may be harmful to persons or
property
o Falling of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if
not caused by force majeure
o Emanations from tubes, canals, sewers, or deposits of
infectious manner, constructed without precautions
suitable to the place
o NOTE: 2, 3, 4 all make the proprietor liable WON there is
due diligence.
E. ENGINEER/ARCHITECT OF COLLAPSED BUILDING
 Art. 1723: Engineer of architect if building collapses 15 years from
completion because of
o Defect in plans and specifications; or
o Defects in the ground
Contractor is responsible if edifice falls within 15 years as a result
of:
o Defects in the construction; or
11 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
o Use of materials of inferior quality furnished by the
contractor; or
o Violation of the terms of the contract
Engineer or architect SOLIDARILY LIABLE with contractor if he
supervised the construction.
 Acceptance of the building does not imply waiver of any of the
causes of action by reason of any defect.
 Action must be brought within 10 years following the collapse of
the building.
 Appears to be a strict liability tort.
F. HEAD OF FAMILY FOR THINGS THROWN OR FALLING
 Art. 2193: Head of a family that lives in a building or a part
thereof is responsible for injury caused by things thrown or falling
from the same.
 Interesting case: if thrown from hotel room
o Casis: Court would determine if the stay would constitute
“living”
 Appears to be a strict liability tort.
G. OWNERS OF ENTERPRISES/OTHER EMPLOYERS
 Art. 1711: compensation in cases of death, injury, illness, or
disease suffered by their employee
 “Other employers” – persons who belong to a class analogous to
“owners of enterprises,” such as those operating a business or
engaged in a particular industry or trade, requiring its managers
to contract the services of laborers, workers, and/or employees
 SITUATIONS COVERED:
o Death or injury
 If death or personal injury arose out of and in the
course of the employment
 Even if the event was purely accidental or due to
a fortuitous event
 Art. 1712: If due to negligence of fellow worker,
latter and employer liable. BUT if fellow worker’s
intentional or malicious act is the only cause of
death/injury, employer is NOT liable (unless
shown that employer did not exercise due
diligence in selection and supervision).
 When employee’s lack of care contributed to his
death or injury, compensation shall be equitably
reduced.
o Illness or disease – if caused by employment or as the
result of the nature of the employment.
 DEFENSES OF EMPLOYER:
o Mishap due to the employee’s own notorious negligence,
or voluntary act, or drunkenness
 Employer NOT LIABLE
o Employer’s lack of due care contributed to his death or
injury
o Fellow worker’s intentional or malicious act is the only
cause of the death or injury
H. MANUFACTURERS/PRODUCERS OF PRODUCTS
 Art. 2187: Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks,
toilet articles and similar goods are liable for death or injuries
caused by any noxious or harmful substances use, although no
contractual relation exists between them and the consumers
o NOTE: Manufacturer and processor, NOT the vendor
 Not sufficient that the product causes death or injury; required
that it be caused by noxious or harmful substances used in the
manufacture or processing of the product.
o Provision does not require that noxious or harmful
substances were knowingly or intentionally used.
 Not a form of culpa contractual – no contractual relation exists.
I. PERSONS WHO INTERFERE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS
12 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

 Art. 1314: Any person who induces another to violate his contract 1. exercise of rights
with another person shall be liable for damages to the other 2. but also to the performance of duties
contracting party. o Casis: may be more appropriate to refer to it as the “no
 WHEN LIABILITY ATTACHES: harm principle” or the “good faith principle”
o Defendant acts with knowledge that interference will considering that it has also been referred to as the
result; and “cardinal rule on human conduct”
o He acts with an improper purpose. o Also been referred to as the “principle of good
 Defendant not liable if he had an impersonal or disinterested dealings”
motive of a laudable character.  “Men must be able to assume that others will do them no
o E.g. protecting a person he is responsible for, to protect intended injury . . . those with whom they deal with in the general
the public interest course of society will act in good faith”
 ELEMENTS OF TORT INTERFERENCE:  Effects:
o Existence of a valid contract o A right, though by itself legal because recognized or
o Knowledge on the part of the third person of the granted by law as such, may nevertheless become the
existence of a contract source of some illegality
o Interference of the third person is without legal o Precludes the defense of damnum absque injuria
justification  Must be implemented with Art. 20 or 21; Art. 19 is a mere
 Lack of malice precludes damage, but it does not declaration of principle
relieve petitioner of the legal liability for entering  ELEMENTS
into contracts and causing breach of existing o A legal right or duty
ones. o Exercised in bad faith
o For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another
 *Good faith:
o An honest intention to abstain from taking any
HUMAN RELATIONS TORTS
unconscientious advantage of another, even through the
A. ABUSE OF RIGHTS forms or technicalities of the law, together with an
 Art. 19 – provides that every person must, in the exercise of his absence of all information or belief or fact which would
rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give render the transaction unconscientious
everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faiths  *Bad faith:
o Abuse of rights! o Does not simply connote bad judgment or negligence; it
o Creates a duty or obligation imputes a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and
o Pertains not only to the conscious doing of a wrong; a breach of sworn duty
13 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
through some motive or intent or ill will; it partakes of the
nature of fraud
B. ILLEGAL ACTS
 Art. 20: provides that every person who, contrary to law, willfully
or negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the
latter for the same
o Legal basis for the award of damages to a party who
suffers damage whenever one commits an act in violation
of some provision
C. ACTS CONTRA BONUS MORES
1. In General
 Art. 21: provides that any person who willfully causes loss or
injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good
customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the
damage
o Purpose: legal remedy for “moral wrongs” which may not
be covered by existing statutes
o Designed to expand the concept of torts or quasi-delict in
this jurisdiction by granting adequate legal remedy for the
untold number of moral wrongs which is impossible for
human foresight to specifically enumerate and punish in
the statute books
o Has been applied to a broad range of cases, including:
 Public or social humiliation
 Moral seduction
 Oppressive dismissal
 Malicious prosecution
 Person becomes liable for damages if:
o Willfully causes injury or loss to another
o In a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or
public policy
 ELEMENTS
o Act which is legal
o Contrary to morals, good custom, public order, or public
policy
o Done with intent to injure
2. Moral Seduction
 Two cases: Tanjanco v. CA & Baksh v. CA
o Tanjanco – No seduction here because “had the appellant
bein deceived, had she surrendered exclusively because of
the deceit, artful persuasions and wiles of the defendant,
she would not have again yielded to his embraces, much
less for one year, without exacting fulfillment of the
alleged promises of marriage . . .”
 Thus, Art. 21 is not applicable.
 Implication of case: if the case involves seduction,
it is not sufficient that the plaintiff prove the
elements of Article 21.
 Must also prove deceit, enticement, superior
power or abuse of confidence on the part of the
defendant and tthat the plaintiff did not succumb
to voluntariness and mutual passion
o Baksh test - must prove the following to justify the award
of damages pursuant to Art. 21:
 Promise is proximate cause
 Lack of intent to fulfill the promise on the part of
the defendant
3. Public Humiliation
14 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
 Pe v. Pe: Alfonso, a married man frequents Lolita’s (24 y.o. single
woman) house on the pretext of wanting her to teach him the
rosary. They fell in love and later the woman disappeared with
him. Court held that the action was based on Art. 21. Alfonso,
being a married man, carried on a love affair with Lolita, thereby
causing plaintiffs injury in a manner contrary to morals,
good customs, and public policy.
o Casis notes that it was interesting that the plaintiffs were
family members and not the person allegedly seduced.
o Art. 21 was not used because of moral seduction but
because of the betrayal of trust and shame inflicted on
the family.
 Grand Union v. Espino: Jose Espino was humiliated by a guard
and Nelia Fandino who insisted that he stole a cylindrical “rat-tail”
file (it was placed in his breast pocket). Court found that the
evidence showed that he had no intention to steal the item and
was falsely accused of shoplifting. Fandino’s remark “Ano, nakaw
na naman ito?” in Espino’s presence was offensive to his dignity
and defamatory to his character and honesty.
 Carpio v. Valmonte: Carpio alleged that Valmonte, wedding
coordinator, stole her jewelry. Her belongings were searched and
yielded nothing. Carpio also demanded a formal letter of apology.
The Court found that the imputations were made with malice and
bad faith. She had no right to attack Valmonte with her
innuendos. Her firmness and resolve to find her missing jewelry
cannot justify her acts.
4. Malicious Prosecution
 Common law sources are often referred to in Philippine cases.
a. Under Common Law
i. Criminal Proceedings Instituted by the Defendant
Against the Plaintiff
o Criminal in character
o Must have been commenced
ii. Termination of the Proceeding in Favor of the Accused
o Must also reflect the merits and not merely a procedural
victory
o Must be terminated in a manner that it cannot be revived
iii. Absence of Probable Cause for the Proceeding
o Probable cause: reasonable ground for belief in the guilt
of the party charged
 Must at least warrant a grave suspicion in the
mind of the prudent person
 Judged by appearances to the defendant at the
time he initiates prosecution, not by facts
discovered later
o Casis: Requirement of proving absence of probable cause
is what makes malicious prosecution suits difficult to
sustain
iv. “Malice” or a Primary Purpose Other Than that of
Bringing an Offended to Justice
o Defendant acted “chiefly to give vent of motives of ill will”
or “where his primary purpose was merely something
other than the social one of bringing an offender to justice
o Malice is present if the defendant “uses the prosecution of
obtaining any private advantage” (???)
15 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
o BUT: any purpose legitimate in itself will not be “malice” if
it is clearly secondary and incidental to the disinterested
one of convicting the guilty
b. Under Philippine Law
i. Definition (Malicious Prosecution or denuncia falsa) –
different meanings provided in book1
o An action for damages brought by one against whom a
criminal prosecution, civil suit, or other legal proceeding
has been instituted maliciously and without probable
cause, after the termination of such prosecution, suit, or
other prosecution
o Term has been expanded to include unfounded civil suits
instituted just to vex and humiliate the defendant despite
the absence of a cause of action or probable cause
o (Disbarment proceeding is judicial in character and may
be the basis for an action for malicious prosecution.)
o Art. 2219(8) – this is one of the cases where moral
damages may be awarded.
ii. Elements (p. 574 – I’ll put the shorter version here)
o Prosecution of the plaintiff by the defendant
o Termination of prosecution in acquittal
o Absence of probable cause
o Prosecution motivated by malice
5. Oppressive Dismissal
1
Also defined as: Prosecution through the misuse or abuse of judicial
processes; or the institution and pursuit of legal proceedings for the
purpose of harassing, annoying, vexing or injuring an innocent person
 Quisaba v. Sta. Ines: Internal auditor was tasked with
purchasing logs. Having refused to do so, he was temporarily
relieved as auditor, and warned that failure to comply would
be considered a ground for dismissal. Court ruled that the
case was intrinsically concerned with a civil (not labor)
dispute and had to do with an alleged violation of Quisaba’s
rights as a member of society. It did not involve an existing
employer-employee relation.
E. VIOLATION OF HUMAN DIGNITY
 Art. 26: provides that every person shall respect the dignity,
personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and
other persons.
 Acts that may produce a cause of action for damages,
prevention and other relief:
i. Prying into the privacy of another’s residence
ii. Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family
relations of another
iii. Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his
friends
iv. Vexing of humiliating another on account of his
religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth,
physical defect, or other personal condition
F. DERELICTION OF DUTY
 Art. 27: provides that any person suffering material or moral loss
because a public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without
just cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for
damages and other relief against the latter, without prejudice to
any disciplinary administrative action that may be taken.
16 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
F. UNFAIR COMPETITION
 Art. 28: provides that unfair competition in agricultural,
commercial or industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of
force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any other unjust,
oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise to a right of
action by the person who thereby suffers damage.
 (Question in class – is this different from “unfair competition” in
the IP Code?)
INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS
A. VIOLATION OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS
1. Persons Responsible
 Art. 32: provides that any public officer or employee, or any
private individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats,
violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the rights
listed in the said article is liable for damages.
 Not only public officers – ALSO PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
 Not the actor only – officer or employee or person “DIRECTLY OR
INDIRECTLY” RESPONSIBLE
o Exception: if defendant is a judge, responsibility under the
article is not demandable . . .
o Exception to the exception: UNLESS his act constitutes a
violation of the Penal Code or other penal statute
2. Malice or Bad Faith Not Required
1. To make such a requisite would defeat the main purpose of Art.
32 which is the effective protection of individual rights.
3. Nature of Acts Covered
1. Violation of the constitutional right of the plaintiff
2. Right is one of those listed in Art. 32
 WON defendant’s act or omission constitutes a criminal offense,
the aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely separate
and distinct civil action for damages, and for other relief, which
will proceed independently of any criminal prosecution and may
be proved by a preponderance of evidence.
4. Rationale for Article 32 – protect the deeply cherished rights and
freedoms enshrined in the Constitution
B. DEFAMATION, FRAUD, AND PHYSICAL INJURIES
Art. 33: provides that in cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries,
a civil action for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the criminal
action, may be brought by the injured party.
 Such civil action shall proceed independently of the criminal
prosecution, and shall require only a preponderance of evidence.
1. In General
 Described as arising ex-delicto
o Based on an obligation created by or arising from a crime
2. Defamation
a. In General
o Injuring a person’s character, fame or reputation through
false and malicious statements
o Words are to be construed in their entirety and taken in
their plain, natural and ordinary meaning, as they would
normally be understood by persons hearing or reading
them, unless it appears that they were used an
understood in another sense
17 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
 Words which are merely insulting are NOT
ACTIONABLE AS LIBEL OR SLANDER PER SE.
(See page 641)
b. Libel
o RPC: A libel is a public and malicious imputation of a
crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to
cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is
dead.
o ELEMENTS:
 Allegation or imputation of a discreditable act or
condition concerning another
 Publication of the imputation
 Not only when it is widely circulated but
also when it is made known or brought to
the attention or notice of another person
other than its author and the offended
party
 Identity of the person defamed
 Existence of malice
 *Actual malice: 1) knowledge of the publicity’s
falsity; or 2) reckless disregard of whether the
contents of the publication were false or not
o NOTE: Published work must be examined and viewed AS
A WHOLE
o Quisumbing v. Lopez, quoted in Arafiles v. Phil.
Journalists: [Newspapers] should not be held to account,
2
See book p. 658.
to a point of suppression, for honest mistakes or
imperfection in the choice of words
o MVRS Publications v. Islamic: MVRS’ article which
allegedly contained a libelous statement that alluded to
the pig as the god of Muslims. Finding that there was “no
fairly identifiable person . . . allegedly injured by the
Bulgar article,” respondents had no individual causes of
action. “When the defamation is alleged to be have
been directed at a group or class, it is essential
that the statement must be so sweeping or all-
embracing as to apply to every individual in that
group or class, or sufficiently specific so that each
individual in the class or group can prove that the
defamatory statement specifically pointed to him.”
o Yuchengco v. Manila Chronicle: Articles imputed
Yuchengco as a “Marcos crony” and accused of unsound
and immoral business practices among others. First three
elements were present. As to malice, the Court discussed
the difference between malice in law (presumption of law)
and malice in fact (positive desire and intention to annoy
and injure).2 Also, the failure to present evidence showing
that they verified the truth of the articles was fatal to
Manila Chronicle’s cause. The articles were not fair
commentaries on matters of public interest and thus did
not fall within the scope of qualifiedly privileged
communications. Yuchengco is also not a public figure,
since there was no evidence that he voluntarily thrust
himself to the forefront of particular public controversies
to influence the resolution of the issues involved.
18 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

3. Fraud o The judge finds no reasonable grounds to believe that a

crime has been committed, or the prosecuting attorney
 Estafa falls under fraud in Art. 33.
refuses or fails to institute criminal proceedings.
o One may opt to reserve his right to file a separate civil
 May be supported by a PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
action or institute an independent action based on fraud
 BUT Court may require plaintiff to file a BOND to indemnify the
pursuant to Art. 33 CC, in contrast with BP 22 where the
defendant in case the complaint should be found to be malicious.
reservation or institution of a separate civil action is
 Civil action is suspended if an information should be presented by
prohibited.
the prosecuting attorney – until the termination of the criminal
4. Physical Injuries proceedings

 Understood to mean “bodily injury” – not used in the RPC sense.

o Includes bodily injuries causing death
o Does NOT include acts committed via negligence

5. Neglect of Duty

 Art. 34: provides that a member of a city or municipal police for

shall be primarily liable for damages if he refuses or fails to render
aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or
property. In such case, the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily
responsible. The civil action shall be independent of any criminal
proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall suffice to
support such action

6. Catch-All Independent Civil Action

 Art. 35: provides that a person may bring a civil action for
damages against the alleged offender when the following
conditions are met:
o The person claiming to be injured by a criminal offense
charges another with the same;
o There is no independent civil action granted in this code
or any special law for such criminal offense; and
19 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

The Concept of Damages
Damages
 The pecuniary consequences which the law imposes for the breach of some
duty or the violation of some right
 Amount of money awarded by the court as a remedy for the injured
Money as principal remedy
 Money is not awarded as a replacement for other money, but as a substitute
for that which is generally more important than money: it is the best thing that
the court can do
o Certain types of loss defy pecuniary measurement: moral suffering,
exemplary damages, etc
When Allowed
- To be entitles to an award of damages, the plaintiff must have suffered
damage as a result of a legal wrong inflicted by the defendant against
him
- Loss or damage by itself does not justify an award of damages. There
must be both:
1. A right of action for a legal wrong inflicted, AND
2. Damage resulting to the plaintiff therefrom
- In an action for damages, the plaintiff must establish “that such injuries
resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the plaintiff-
a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff and legal responsibility by the
person causing it [Custodio vs CA]
Distinction
- INJURY: the illegal invasion of a legal right
- DAMAGE: the loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury
- DAMAGES: the recompense or compensation awarded for damages
suffered
Damnum absque injuria
 Damage without injury
 Instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a
legal duty
 The law affords no remedy for damages resulting from an act which does
not amount to a legal injury or wrong
 In order that the law will give redress for an act causing damage, that act
must not only be hurtful, but wrongful. There must be damnum et
injuria. If a person sustains actual damage without sustaining any legal
injury, the damage is regarded as damnum absque injuria. [Custodio vs
CA]
Actual or Compensatory Damages
Art. 2199. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to an
adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has
duly proved. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory
damages.
- Purpose: to put the claimant in the position in which he had been before
he was injured
- They proceed from a sense of natural justice and are designed to repair
the wrong that has been done, to compensate for the injury inflicted and
not to impose a penalty. [PNOC vs CA]
Proof Required
 The award of actual damages requires pleading and proof injury suffered
20 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
 The award must be based on evidence presented, not on personal
knowledge of the court and certainly not on flimsy, remote, speculative
and non-substantial proof
 The award of actual damages is intended for such injuries or losses that
are actually sustained and susceptible of measurement. Thus, it may not
be proper for loss of things whose value cannot be computed (loss of
privacy, loss of marital consortium). Other things may have value beyond
their market value, but actual damages would only cover their market
value (historic, artistic or items with sentimental value)
 The burden of proof of the damage suffered is imposed on the party
claiming the same who should adduce the best evidence available in
support thereof. In the absence of corroborative evidence, it has been held
that self-serving statements of account are not sufficient basis for an
award of actual damages
 The amount of loss must be capable of proof, it must also be actually
proven with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent
prof or the best evidence obtainable [PNOC Shipping vs CA]
Loss Covered
Art. 2200. Indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of
the loss suffered, but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain.
- Daño emergente: loss of what a person already possesses
- Lucro cesante: failure to receive as a benefit that which would have
pertained to him
 In actions based on torts or quasi-delicts, actual damages include all natural
and probable consequences of that act or omission complained of.
Formula for computation of unearned income
- Damages consist, not of the full amount of earnings, but of the support
they received or would have received from him had he not died in the
consequence of negligence of the latter’s agent [Villa Rey vs CA]
Net Earning Capacity = life expectancy x (gross annual income – necessary living
expenses)
Life Expectancy = 2/3 x (80-age of deceased at time of death)
In Contracts and Quasi-Contracts
Art. 2201. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the damages for which the obligor
who acted in good faith is liable shall be those that are the natural and probable
consequences of the breach of the obligation, and which the parties have foreseen
or could have reasonably foreseen at the time the obligation was constituted.
In case of fraud, bad faith, malice or wanton attitude, the obligor shall be
responsible for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-
performance of the obligation.
- In the absence of good faith, foreseeability is not a requirement and the
link between damages and breach need not be natural and probable
- BPI Family Bank vs Franco: BPI-FB acted out of the impetus of self-
protection and not out of malevolence or ill will.
o BPI-FB was not in the corrupt state of mind contemplated in Art
2201 and should not be held liable for all damages now being
imputed to it for its breach of obligation. It is not liable for the
unearned interest on the time deposit.
- Bad faith: imports a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and
conscious doing of wrong; it partakes of the nature of fraud.
In Crimes and Quasi-Delict
Art. 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all
damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission
21 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could
have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant.
- Foreseeability and good faith are irrelevant
- Also applicable to Art 19 which is neither crime or QD (it’s a tort)
Earning Capacity, Business Standing
Art. 2205. Damages may be recovered:
(1) For loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or
permanent personal injury;
(2) For injury to the plaintiff's business standing or commercial credit.
- To claim for loss of employment, such employment must not be episodic and
contingent. [Gatchalian vs Delim – substitute teacher in bus accident]
Death by Crime or Quasi-delict
Art. 2206. The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict
shall be at least three thousand pesos, even though there may have been
mitigating circumstances. In addition:
(1) The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the
deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such
indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless
the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the
defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death;
(2) If the deceased was obliged to give support according to the provisions of
Article 291, the recipient who is not an heir called to the decedent's
inheritance by the law of testate or intestate succession, may demand support
from the person causing the death, for a period not exceeding five years, the
exact duration to be fixed by the court;
(3) The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the
deceased may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the
death of the deceased.
- the P3,000 indemnity is mandatory and granted to the heirs of the victim without
need of proof other than the commission of the crime.
- P75,000 if penalty was death/should have been death if not for the
abolition of the death penalty
- P50,000 is by reclusion perpetua
Loss of earning capacity: GR: documentary evidence should be presented to
substantiate the claim
- Exceptions: (1) deceased was self-employed and earning less than
minimum wage;(2) deceased was employed as a daily wage worker
earning less than minimum wage
In Rape Cases
- Award of moral damages is separate and distinct from the civil indemnity
awarded to rape victims
- While the award of moral damages is discretionary on the court the civil
indemnity, which is actually in the nature of actual or compensatory
damages, in mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape.
Attorney’s Fees
Art. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees and expenses of
litigation, other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except:
(1) When exemplary damages are awarded;
(2) When the defendant's act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate
with third persons or to incur expenses to protect his interest;
(3) In criminal cases of malicious prosecution against the plaintiff;
(4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or proceeding against the
plaintiff;
(5) Where the defendant acted in gross and evident bad faith in refusing to
satisfy the plaintiff's plainly valid, just and demandable claim;
(6) In actions for legal support;
22 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

(7) In actions for the recovery of wages of household helpers, laborers and Rules in jurisprudence:
skilled workers; 1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum
(8) In actions for indemnity under workmen's compensation and employer's of money, the interest should be that which may have been stipulated in
liability laws; writing.
(9) In a separate civil action to recover civil liability arising from a crime; a. Interest due shall earn legal interest from the time it is
(10) When at least double judicial costs are awarded; extrajudicially demanded.
(11) In any other case where the court deems it just and equitable that b. In the absence of stipulation, interest shal be 12% per annum
attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered. 2. When an obligation not constituting a loan or forbearance of money is
In all cases, the attorney's fees and expenses of litigation must be reasonable. breached, an interest on the award of damages may be imposed at the
- Art 2208 is an award in favor of the litigant, not of his counsel, and discretion of the court at 6% per annum
litigant, not his counsel, is the judgment creditor who may enforce the a. To run from the time the claim is made judicially or
judgment for attorney’s fees by execution [Quirante vs IAC] extrajudicially, or
- Attorney’s fees and expenses of litgation are recoverable only in the b. If demand cannot be established with reasonable certainty, from
concept of actual damages, not as moral damages not judicial costs, and the date the judgment of the court is made
must be specifically prayed for 3. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final
Interest and executory, the rate of legal interest shall be 12% per annum from
Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the such finality until its satisfaction, this interim period being deemed as a
debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to forbearance of credit.
the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence Duty to minimize
of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six per cent per annum. Art. 2203. The party suffering loss or injury must exercise the diligence of a good
Art. 2210. Interest may, in the discretion of the court, be allowed upon damages father of a family to minimize the damages resulting from the act or omission in
awarded for breach of contract. question.
Art. 2211. In crimes and quasi-delicts, interest as a part of the damages may, in Mitigation of Damages
a proper case, be adjudicated in the discretion of the court. Art. 2214. In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff shall
Art. 2212. Interest due shall earn legal interest from the time it is judicially reduce the damages that he may recover.
demanded, although the obligation may be silent upon this point. Art. 2215. In contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts, the court may
Art. 2213. Interest cannot be recovered upon unliquidated claims or damages, equitably mitigate the damages under circumstances other than the case referred
except when the demand can be established with reasonably certainty. to in the preceding article, as in the following instances:
23 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

(1) That the plaintiff himself has contravened the terms of the contract;
(2) That the plaintiff has derived some benefit as a result of the contract;
(3) In cases where exemplary damages are to be awarded, that the defendant
acted upon the advice of counsel;
(4) That the loss would have resulted in any event;
(5) That since the filing of the action, the defendant has done his best to lessen
the plaintiff's loss or injury.
 The act or omission of the defendant falls within the specified cases when
moral damages may be awarded
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous
cases:
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries;
(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries;
(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts;
(4) Adultery or concubinage;

Moral Damages (5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest;

(6) Illegal search;
Purpose
(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation;
1. To compensate the moraly injured
(8) Malicious prosecution;
2. To alleviate his suffering
(9) Acts mentioned in Article 309;
Moral damages are in the category of an award designed to compensate the
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and
claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer.
35.
- Compensatory and not punitive
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or abused, referred to in No.
- Purpose is indemnity or reparation
3 of this article, may also recover moral damages.
- Its award is aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the spiritual stat
The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters may bring the
us quo ante; thus, it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted.
action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the order named.
The award of moral damages is designed to compensate and alleviate he physical
Criminal offense resulting in physical injuries
suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded
- GR: Proof of mental anguish or emotional distress is required for recover
feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar harm unjustly caused to a
of moral damages.
person.
- Exception: In case of violent death or brutal killing, allegation and proof
When Recoverable
moral suffering are not required
 When moral suffering is the proximate result of the act or omission of the
- A violent death invariably brings about emotional pain and anguish on the
defendant
part of the victim’s family... leaves them with the gnawing feeling that an
o Claimant should satisfactorily show the existence of the factual basis
injustice has been done to them. For this reason, moral damages must be
or damage and its causal connection to defendant’s acts
24 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
awarded even in the absence of any allegation or proof of the heir’s
emotional suffering
Rape
- Moral damages is also automatically granted in rape cases without need
of further proof other than the commission of the crime
Acts mentioned in Art 309
- Any person who shows disrespect to the dead, or wrongfully interferes
with a funeral shall be liable to the family of the deceased for damages,
material and moral.
Acts referred to in:
Art 21 – Acts contra bonos mores; Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to
another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall
compensate the latter for the damage.
Art 26 – Violation of human dignity; Every person shall respect the dignity,
personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons...
Art 27 – Refusal or Neglect of Duty; Any person suffering material or moral loss
because a public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to
perform his official duty may file an action for damages and other relief against he
latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that may be
taken.
Art 28 – Unfair Competition; Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or
industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of force, intimidation, deceit,
machination or any other unjust, oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise
to a right of action by the person who thereby suffers damage.
Art 29 - When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground
that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for
damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action requires only
a preponderance of evidence. Upon motion of the defendant, the court may
require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint
should be found to be malicious.
If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt, the
court shall so declare. In the absence of any declaration to that effect, it may be
inferred from the text of the decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that
ground.
Art 30 - When a separate civil action is brought to demand civil liability arising
from a criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings are instituted during the
pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of evidence shall likewise be sufficient
to prove the act complained of.
Art 32- Violation of Civil and Political Rights; Any public officer or employee, or any
private individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any
manner impedes or impairs any of the following rights and liberties of another
person shall be liable to the latter for damages…
Art 34 - When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses or fails to
render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or property, such
peace officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the city or municipality
shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. The civil action herein recognized shall be
independent of any criminal proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall
suffice to support such action.
Art 35 - When a person, claiming to be injured by a criminal offense, charges
another with the same, for which no independent civil action is granted in this
Code or any special law, but the justice of the peace finds no reasonable grounds
to believe that a crime has been committed, or the prosecuting attorney refuses or
fails to institute criminal proceedings, the complaint may bring a civil action for
damages against the alleged offender. Such civil action may be supported by a
preponderance of evidence. Upon the defendant's motion, the court may require
25 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
the plaintiff to file a bond to indemnify the defendant in case the complaint should
be found to be malicious.
If during the pendency of the civil action, an information should be presented by
the prosecuting attorney, the civil action shall be suspended until the termination
of the criminal proceedings.
Willful injury to property & breach of contract in bad faith
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for awarding moral
damages if the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages are
justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where the defendant
acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
Breach of contract in bad faith
- Moral damages may be recovered when the defendant wa guilty of gross
negligence which amounts to bad faith orni wanton disregard of his
contractual obligation and, exceptionally, when the ac of breach of
contract itself is constitutive of tort resulting in physical injuries
Who may recover
1. Relatives of injured person
- Parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or abused in Art
2219
- Spouse, descendants, ascendants, brothers and sisters under Art 309
2. Juridical persons
- Moral damges cannot be granted to a corporation because, being an
artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation, it
has no feelings, no emotions, no senses.
- Art 2219[7] does not qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or
juridical person. A juridical person such as a corporation can validly
complain for libel or any other form of defamation and claim for
moral damages. [ABS-CBN vs CA]
Factors considered in determining amount
1. Award must not be too much or too little
2. Must somehow be proportional to and in approximation of the suffering
inflicted
a. Social and financial standing of the injured party
b. Their wounded moral feelings and personal pride
Nominal Damages
Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff,
which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or
recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss
suffered by him.
 Award of nominal damages is not intended for indemnification of loss but
for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded
 Not treated as an equivalent of a wrong inflicted but simply a recognition
of the existence of a technical injury
When Recoverable
Art. 2222. The court may award nominal damages in every obligation arising
from any source enumerated in Article 1157, or in every case where any property
right has been invaded.
 So long as there is a showing of a violation of the right of the plaintiff, an
award of nominal damages is proper
 When plaintiff suffers some species of injury not enough to warrant an award
of actual damages, the court may award nominal damages
 Nominal damages are recoverable when a legal right is technically violated
and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual
26 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

present loss of any kind, or where there has been a breach of contract and 3. Special reasons extant in the case
no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be  PNOC Shipping: case dragged on for two decades
shown  People vs Bernardo: short duration of kidnapping = reduced nominal
o Recoverable where some injury has been done, the amount of which damages
the evidence fails to show Effect of Award
 When plaintiff suffers some species of injury not enough to warrant an award Art. 2223. The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further contest
of actual damages, the court may award nominal damages [Twin Ace vs upon the right involved and all accessory questions, as between the parties to the
Rufina] suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.
 Cojuangco vs CA: to hold public officers personally liable for moral and
exemplary damages and for attorney’s fees for acts done in the performance Temperate Damages
of official functions, the plaintiff must prove that these officers exhibited acts
- Included within the context of compensatory damages
characterized by evident bad faith, malice, or gross negligence. But eveni if
When Awarded
their acts has not been so tainted, public officers may still be held liable for
1. Nature of case prevents determination of actual loss
nominal damages if they had violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
Art. 2224. Temperate or moderate damages, which are more than nominal but
 Under considerations of equity, as in the case of Sps Guanio vs Makati
less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when the court finds that
Shangri-La (proximate cause of Sps’ injury was their own increase in guests
some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount can not, from the nature of
but Makati Shangri-La still liable to Sps for discomfiture they were subjected
the case, be provided with certainty.
to)
2. Cases where amount of loss not proved
Nature and Determination of Amount
 Jurisprudence also allowed the award of temperate damages where the
1. Small but substantial
actual amount of loss was not proven with certainty, even if the nature of
 Nominal damages are generally by their nature small sums, the amount
the case allows for the possibility of pecuniary loss being proven with
of which should not be based on the extent of harm to the injured party
certainty
 Jurisprudence also provides that ND is a substantial claim, if based upon
o Cases where the amount of actual damages was not proven due
the violation of a legal right; in such case, the law presumes a damage,
to inadequacy of the evidence presented by the prosecution
although actual or compensatory damages are not proven
3. In addition to actual damages
2. Commensurate to injury suffered
 Chronic and Continuing Injury
 ND should not be equivalent of a wrong inflicted but merely a recognition
of the existence of a technical injury
27 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

o Temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of - The award of 25k as temperate damages in homicide or murder cases
actual or compensatory damages in instances where the injury is is proper when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented
chronic and continuing. [Ramos vs CA] in the trial court
 In addition to civil indemnity (death) - Under Art 2224, TD may be recovered, as it cannot be denied that the
 In addition to other actual damages proven heirs of the victims suffered pecuniary loss, although the exact amount
o TD awarded in lieu of actual damages not proven in addition to was not proved.
actual damages proven
Factors in Determining Amount
Liquidated Damages
1. In General
Art. 2226. Liquidated damages are those agreed upon by the parties to a
- More than nominal but less than actual damages
contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof.
- Reasonable under the circumstances
- Can only exist if there is a contract between the parties
Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the
- Contract may provide for liquidated damages even if the term itself is not
circumstances
used
2. Receipts amounting to less than 25k
- Common for liquidated damages to be referred to as “attorney’s fees”
o If actual damages proven by receipts are less than 25k, the award of
(different from that recoverable as between attorney and client)
temperate damages for 25k is justified in lieu of actual damages
- Provision on liquidated damages in contract will not necessarily apply in
[People vs Lucero: murder case where no evidence of burial and
case of breach of contract; only applies to those contemplated by the
funeral expenses was presented in trial court]
parties
o If the amount of actual damages proven exceends 25k, then
 Art. 2228. When the breach of the contract committed by the
temperate damages may no longer be awarded [People vs Andres]
defendant is not the one contemplated by the parties in agreeing upon
o Used to cover only funeral expenses but the rule has evolved to also
the liquidated damages, the law shall determine the measure of
cover medical expenses and loss of income
damages, and not the stipulation.
3. No receipts provided
Purpose
- Where the amount of actual damages cannot be determined because
Art. 2227. Liquidated damages, whether intended as an indemnity or a penalty,
no receipts were presented to prove the same but it is shown that the
shall be equitably reduced if they are iniquitous or unconscionable.
heirs are entitled thereto; fixed at 25k
- Either compensatory or punitive in nature
28 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

1. To compensate the non-breaching party for the injury caused by the d. “Proportionality to purpose” test
other party’s breach, or o If the purpose is to compensate, then the amount must
2. To punish the breaching party correspond to the actual injury suffered.
 Nothing wrong with awarded liquidated damages along with other types of o If the purpose is punitive, then it becomes a policy decision and
damages the injury suffered by the innocent party need not be taken in
Reducing the Amount consideration
1. When iniquitous or unconscionable e. Necessity test
a. Iniquitous: one characterized by gross injustice o Given the other stipulations in the contract, is the amount
b. Unconscionable: excessive, unreasonable, or shockingly unfair or stipulated as liquidated damages necessary as indemnity or
unjust penalty?
2. Possible Tests f. When in pari delicto
a. Apply rules on penalty clauses o Reduce the liquidated damages in half because the other party
o Partly objective and partly subjective was also guilty of a breach
o Depend on the type, extent and purpose of the penalty, the g. Consider actual damages
nature of the obligation, the mode of breach and its o In determining whether a penalty clause if iniquitous and
consequences, the supervening realities, the standing and unconscionable, a court may very well take into account the
relationship of the parties, and the like actual damages sustained by a creditor who was compelled to
o The Court must consider the circumstances of each case. sue the defaulting debtor, which actual damages would include
b. “Attorney’s Fees” Test the interest and penalties the creditor may have had to pay on
o For this reason, we do not really have to strictly view the its own from its funding source
reasonableness of the attorneys' fees in the light of such factors
as the amount and character of the services rendered, the Exemplary Damages
nature and importance of the litigation, and the professional
Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or
character and the social standing of the attorney. We do
correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or
concede, however, that these factors may be an aid in the
compensatory damages.
determination of the iniquity or unconscionableness of attorneys'
fees as liquidated damages. [Polytrade vs Blanco]
c. Applying precedent
29 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021
- Exemplary damages are required by public policy, for wanton acts must be
suppressed, they are an antidote so that the poison of wickedness may not
run through the body politic
- Corrective in nature
 Intended to serve as a deterrent to serious wrongdoings and as a
vindication of undue sufferings and wanton invasion of the rights of an
injured or a punishment for those guilty of outrageous conduct.
When Imposed
 Cannot be recovered as a matter of right as the court will decide whether or
not they should be adjudicated.
Art. 2234. While the amount of the exemplary damages need not be proved, the
plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory
damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary
damages should be awarded. In case liquidated damages have been agreed upon,
although no proof of loss is necessary in order that such liquidated damages may
be recovered, nevertheless, before the court may consider the question of granting
exemplary in addition to the liquidated damages, the plaintiff must show that he
would be entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages were it not for
the stipulation for liquidated damages.
Requirements for exemplary damages to be awarded:
1. Imposed by way of example in addition to compensatory damages, and
only after the claimant’s right to them has been established
2. Cannot be recovered as a matter of right
3. In actions based on contract or quasi-contract: Act must be accompanied
by bad faith or done in a wanton, fraudulent, oppressive, or malevolent
manner
Renunciation in advance
Art. 2235. A stipulation whereby exemplary damages are renounced in advance
shall be null and void.
In Crimes
Art. 2230. In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability
may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct from fines and shall be
paid to the offended party.
- “aggravating circumstances” should be interpreted in its broad or generic
sense
- Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, which took effect on December 1,
2000, now requires that aggravating circumstances must be alleged in the
information in order to be validly appreciated by the court.
- People vs Dalisay: exemplary damages may still be awarded in situations
where the circumstances of the case show the highly reprehensible or
outrageous conduct of the offender
- Although an aggravating circumstance not specifically alleged in the
information (albeit established at trial) cannot be appreciated to increase
the criminal liability of the accused, the established presence of one or two
aggravating circumstances of any kind or nature entitles the offended
party to exemplary damages under Article 2230 of the Civil Code because
the requirement of specificity in the information affected only the criminal
liability of the accused, not his civil liability. [People vs Dadulla]
In Quasi-Delicts
Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant
acted with gross negligence.
- While the immediate beneficiaries of the standard of extraordinary diligence
are, of course, the passengers and owners of cargo carried by a common
carrier, they are not only persons that the law seeks to benefit. For if
30 Villafuerte, Montenegro B2021

common carriers carefully observed the statutory standard of extraordinary

diligence in respect of of their own passengers, they cannot help but
simultaneously benefit pedestrians and the owners and passengers of other
vehicles who are equally entitled to the safe and convenient use of our roads
and highways.
- If gross negligence warrants the award of exemplary damages, with more
reason is its imposition justified when the act performed is deliberate,
malicious and tainted with bad faith [Philtranco vs CA]
In Contracts and Quasi-Contracts
Art. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary
damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or
malevolent manner.