Garces, Sean Denmark H.

202030136091
02/24/23

PARTNERSHIP AND CORPORATION

CASE DIGEST

ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. Court of Appeals,

G.R. No. 128690, January 21, 1999

FACTS:

ABS-CBN and Viva executed a Film exhibition agreement in 1990, whereby Viva gave
ABS-CBN an exclusive right to exhibit some Viva films. The agreement included a provision
giving ABS-CBN the right of refusal for the next twenty-four Viva films for TV telecast, to be
exercised within 15 days of receiving the offer.

In December 1991, Viva offered ABS-CBN three film packages, but ABS-CBN only accepted 10
titles, including “Maging Sino Ka Man”.ABS-CBN rejected the initial offer and requested
additional runs for certain unaired titles from the first contract and expressed difficulty through a
letter from Charo Santos-Concio in recommending the purchase of the offered film packages
due to lack of big action stars and cheap production values of some films..

In February 1992, Viva offered ABS-CBN a package consisting of 52 original movie titles from
the first contract. Allegedly, a meeting took place between ABS-CBN’s Eugenion Lopez III and
Viva’s Vicente del Rosario, where they discussed the purchase of 14 Viva Films for P36 million,
but there was a dispute about the agreement’s terms.

ABS-CBN submits a counter-proposal covering 53 films for P35 million, which is rejected by
VIVA’s Board of Directors. VIVA signs a letter of agreement with RBS, granting RBS the
exclusive right to air 104 Viva-produced films, including the disputed fourteen films. ABS-CBN
filed a complaint against RBS, VIVA, Vicente del Rosario, seeking specific performance and
injunctive relief.

The RTC issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the airing of disputed films. Followed by
a preliminary injunction. The parties engaged in settlement discussions, but no agreement was
reached.

The RTC dissolved the preliminary injunction after RBS posted a counterbond. ABS-CBN
appealed to the Court of Appeals which dismissed the appeal, and awarded damages to RBS
and Viva for pecuniary losses, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees, based
on ABS-CBN’s filing of complaint despite knowing the contract had not been perfected.
ISSUE/S:

Whether or not the RBS is entitled to Moral Damages

RUILING:

No, Moral damages are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for
actual injury suffered. and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. In this case, RBS is not a
natural person but rather an artificial person. Which means an organization or juridical entity
recognized by the law, in other words it is a corporation. And being an artificial person and
having existence only in legal contemplation, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses, It
cannot, therefore, experience physical suffering and mental anguish, which call be experienced
only by one having a nervous system.