1.

Without the proof as to the origin of the fire, does the Station manager of SHELL can be
presumed negligent?
2. Without the proof as to the origin of the fire, does the SHELL Company will be held liable
for the residences where the fire destroyed their houses?

Articles for 1 & 2.

Art. 1156. An obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do or not to do. (n)

Art. 1157. Obligations arise from:

(1) Law;

(2) Contracts;

(3) Quasi-contracts;

(4) Acts or omissions punished by law; and

(5) Quasi-delicts. (1089a)

Art. 1163. Every person obliged to give something is also obliged to take care of it with
the proper diligence of a good father of a family, unless the law or the stipulation of the
parties requires another standard of care. (1094a)

Art. 1172. Responsibility arising from negligence in the performance of every kind of
obligation is also demandable, but such liability may be regulated by the courts,
according to the circumstances. (1103)

Art. 1173. The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence
which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds with the
circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows bad
faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph 2, shall apply.

If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be observed in the
performance, that which is expected of a good father of a family shall be required.
(1104a)

Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise declared
by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no
person shall be responsible for those events which could not be foreseen, or which,
though foreseen, were inevitable. (1105a)
CHAPTER 2 QUASI-DELICTS

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 the provisions of this Chapter. (1902a)

Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely
separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the Penal
Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the
defendant. (n)

Art. 2178. The provisions of Articles 1172 to 1174 are also applicable to a quasi-delict.
(n)

Art. 2179. When the plaintiff's own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause
of his injury, he cannot recover damages. But if his negligence was only contributory, the
immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the defendant's lack of due care, the
plaintiff may recover damages, but the courts shall mitigate the damages to be
awarded. (n)

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, the mother, are responsible for the
damages caused by the minor children who live in their company.

Guardians are liable for damages caused by the minors or incapacitated persons who
are under their authority and live in their company.

The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for
damages caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are
employed or on the occasion of their functions.

Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees and household
helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not
engaged in any business or industry.

The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special agent; but not
when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the task done properly
pertains, in which case what is provided in Article 2176 shall be applicable.
Lastly, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades shall be liable for damages
caused by their pupils and students or apprentices, so long as they remain in their
custody.

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. (1903a)

Explanation 1

Negligence will be first presumed to the Station manager of the company as stated to
Art 2180 even without the proof for the origin of fire but the damages are incurred. It is
the manager of the station who has the greater liability for his jurisdiction to supervise
and manage for what is undergoing in his premises.

Explanation 2

As per Art 1157 which classified this case as Quasi-Delict, Shell Company obliged to pay
for the damages of the incident, whether it is negligence or unintentional, also as per
Art 2176 to 2179. Affected residences may file lawsuit to Shell even it is just a form of
accident. But the mere fact that damages are done to their houses due to the incident
happened to their premise, they are liable for its cost and becomes a demand arised.

2. 1. Is Paquito who ordered to climb be held liable?

2. Is it Paquito or parents of Juan must observed the Article !!63 over him?
Articles for 1 & 2.

Art. 1163. Every person obliged to give something is also obliged to take care of it with
the proper diligence of a good father of a family, unless the law or the stipulation of the
parties requires another standard of care. (1094a)

Art. 1306. The contracting parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and
conditions as they may deem convenient, provided they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order, or public policy. (1255a)

Art. 1173. The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence
which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds with the
circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows bad
faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph 2, shall apply.

If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be observed in the
performance, that which is expected of a good father of a family shall be required.
(1104a)

Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise
declared by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of
risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which could not be foreseen, or
which, though foreseen, were inevitable. (1105a)

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.

Explanation 1

It is said that a minor can enforce a contract against the other party, providing it is an
adult, but there is a general presumption that contracts with minors are unenforceable.
However, some contracts with a minor are valid, and therefore enforceable. But the
mere fact that it is an eight years old child, who bounds to agree for this kind of
prestation with a 45 years old man, it made Paquito to be the most liable for the said
incident as what has been said to Art 1163 and 1173.

Explanation 2

For the incident, that if it just happened without the knowledge of the parents of Juan,
Paquito may presumed for contribution of murder where the risk of death is present,
 but still he pushed the child to climb the slippery tall tree offering the part of the fruits
as a return.

3. 1. Can JEYEM-A has the right to recover what he had been paid to EYBIYES before the due
date?

2. In case the former is aware on the said due date but still he pay it in advance. 3
months before the due date JEYEM-A wanted to recover what he had been paid to the
former. Can JEYEM-A recover?

Articles for 1&2

Art. 1195. Anything paid or delivered before the arrival of the period, the obligor being
unaware of the period or believing that the obligation has become due and
demandable, may be recovered, with the fruits and interests. (1126a)

Art. 1196. Whenever in an obligation a period is designated, it is presumed to have

been established for the benefit of both the creditor and the debtor, unless from the
tenor of the same or other circumstances it should appear that the period has been
established in favor of one or of the other. (1127)

Explanation 1

Yes. JEYEM-A may recover or demand to return from EYBIYES all of the cost of payment
made which is deemed to be unaware of the real due date in good faith.

Articles for 2

No. JEYEM-A will no longer recover his payment for the due.