Chapter 2

HUMAN RELATIONS

Art 19. Every person must, in the exercise of the rights and in the performance of his duties, act with
justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.
Art 20. Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damages to another, shall
indemnify the latter for the same.
Art 21. 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.

Art. 19, commonly referred to as the principle of abuse of rights, sets certain standards which may be
observed not only in the exercise of one’s rights but also in the performance of one’s duties. These
standards are the following: to act with justice, to give everyone his due and to observe honesty and
good faith.
Elements of Abuse of rights:
a. There is a legal right or duty
b. Which is exercised in bad faith
c. For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another

Art. 20 speaks of the general sanction for all other provisions of law which do not provide their own
sanction. Thus, anyone who, contrary to law, whether will willfully or negligently, causes damage to
another, shall indemnify his/her victim for injuries suffered thereby.
Art. 21 deals with acts contra bonus mores, or acts which are contrary to morals, good customs or
public policy. It presupposes loss or injury, material or otherwise, which one may suffer as a result of the
violation.
Elements of contra bonus mores:
a. There is an act which is legal
b. Contrary to morals, good customs, public order, or public policy
c. Done with intent to injure

Articles 19, 20 and 21 are related to each other and, under these articles, an act which causes injury to
another may be made the basis for an award of damages. In Articles 19 and 21, the act must be
intentional while in Article 20, the act may be done “willfully” or “negligently”.

Example:
- A group of drivers claiming to protect the interest of all drivers formed a protest against the
transportation company to a certain policies of the company and take over the motor units of
the transpo company paralyzing the operation of the company for ten days. The court held that
the petitioner violated the legal rights of the person as provided under article 21 of the civil
code and affirmed the decision of the lower court.

Art 22. Every person who through an act or performance by another, or any other means, acquires or
comes into possession of something at the expense of the later without just or legal ground, shall
return the same to him.
Art 23. Even when an act or event causing damage to another’s property was not due to the fault or
negligence of the defendant, the latter shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or event he was
benefited.
Articles 22 and 23 are based on the principle that no person shall be unjustly enriched at the expense of
another person. They are what is referred by law as “quasi-contracts”, namely:

a) solutio indebite or undue payment (Art. 22). No person can claim what is not validly and legally
his or hers. Thus, he should not unduly profit on something which does not meritoriously belong
to him or to her.

b) negotiorum gestio or unauthorized management (Art. 23). This means that a person should not
be allowed to profit or enrich himself inequitably at another’s expense.

Example:
- a person in a good faith invested money to plant trees where it turns the land is a timberland
belonging to the states, the court held to pay the person the value of the actual improvements
he made. To simply order to simply surrender all of these fruit bearing trees in favor of the state
because the decision is irreversible would inequitably result in unjust enrichment of the state at
the expense of Reyes, a planter in good faith.

Art 24. In all contractual, property or other relations, when one of the parties is at disadvantage on
account of his moral dependence, ignorance, indigence, mental weakness, tender age or other
handicap, the courts must be vigilant for his protection.

- provides that the courts must render justice and therefore, they must be very vigilant in
protecting the rights of the disadvantaged (on account of his moral dependence, ignorance,
indigence, mental weakness, tender age or other handicap) with the end in view that any
decision will be in consonance with what is right and legal.

Example:
- Heirs of the victim chose not to appeal the hope that the transpo company will pay the dadmges
awarded by the lower court but unfortunately said company still appealed to the Ca, which step
was dilatory and oppressive of the rights of the said claimants; that the case had been pending
in court for 30 years, so that an exception of the rule aforestated, the said heirs should be
afforded equitable relief by the courts as it must be vigilant for their protection. The court held
that the claim for legal interest should be entertained in spite of the failure of the claimants to
appeal.

Art 25. Thoughtless extravagance in expenses for pleasure or display during a period of acute public
want or emergency may be stopped by order of the courts at the instance of any government or
private charitable institution.

- seeks to prevent inconsiderate and ostentatious activities during time of emergency. However,
the entities which are given legal standing to seek an injunction are limited to any government
or private charitable institution.

Art 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors
and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense,
shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other reliefs:
1. prying into the privacy of another’s residence;
2. meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another;
 3. intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends
4. vexing or humiliating another on account of religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birt,
physical defect or other personal condition.

- The privacy of one’s home is an inviolable right.

Example:
- A family sent a telegram to another member of a family asking for money for their mother
where the telegram company was negligent in failing to send the telegram on time and in not
immediately informing the family thereby causing filial disturbance. The court held that the
company shall award the family for damages under art 26 for the act or omission of the
telegraph that disturbed the peace of mind of the family.

Art 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or employee refuses or
neglects, without a 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.

- provides for relief against public officials. Any person, suffering from the refusal or neglect of
any government employee or public servant to perform his duties, is entitled to damages.

Art 28. Unfair competition in agri, commercial or industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of
force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any other unjust, oppressive, or highlighted method shall
give rise to a right of action by the person who thereby suffers damage.

- 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
damages.

Art 29. When the accused in criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not
been proved beyond reasonable doubts, 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, preponderance of
evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained of.

- even if the civil obligation arose from the a criminal offense, the required quantum of evidence
in a civil suit to claim such civil obligation is not proof beyond reasonable doubt but merely
preponderance of evidence.
Art 31. When the civil action is based on an obligation not rising from the act or omission complained
of as felony, such civil action may proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and regardless
of the result of the latter
- There are certain injuries which do not necessarily arise from the commission of a crime. Art 31
seeks to give an aggrieved party a remedy and a cause of action in this kind of situation.

Civil Liability Arising from Commission of Crime: Principles:

1) For every criminal liability there is a corresponding civil liability (e.g. of exceptions: treason,
rebellion, espionage and contempt). Under the Rules of Court, when a criminal action is instituted,
the civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action
subject to the following exceptions:

a) when the offended party waives the civil action;

b) when the offended party reserves the right to institute it separately;
c) institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action;
d) when the law grants the offended party the right to institute a civil action which is entirely
separate and independent from the criminal action (independent civil action) such as when the
action is based on:

d.1)defamation (e.g. libel, oral defamation) d.2) fraud (including estafa)

d.3)physical injuries (Articles 32, 33 and 34 of the Civil Code) [includes homicide]

In these cases, even if the act or omission complained of may constitute a crime, the civil action may
proceed independently of the civil action.

2) A civil action based on or arising from a crime which has been reserved cannot be instituted
until the final judgment has been entered in the criminal action. Moreover, if the criminal action is
filed after the civil action has already been instituted the latter may be suspended in whatever state
it may be found before judgment on the merits and the suspension shall last until final judgment is
rendered in the criminal action (Art. 35). However, the civil action may be consolidated with the
criminal action.

3) Degree of proof required:

a) for civil liability – preponderance of evidence

b) for criminal liability – proof beyond reasonable doubt.

4) Acquittal of the accused which extinguishes his criminal liability does not necessarily result to
the extinction of his civil liability. If his acquittal is based on the established fact that he did not
commit the crime, then his civil liability is deemed extinguished. However, if his acquittal is based on
the fact that the prosecution failed to produce evidence beyond reasonable doubt, the action on his
civil liability may proceed because the degree of proof required is only preponderance of evidence.

Art 32. Any public officer or employees, 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:
1. Freedom of religion;
2. Freedom of speech;
3. Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a periodical publication
4. Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention;
5. Freedom of suffrage;
6. The right against deprivation of property without due process of law;
7. The right to a just compensation when private property is taken for public use;
8. The right to equal protection of the laws;
9. The right to be secure in one’s person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable
searched and seizures;
10. The liberty of abode and of changing the same
11. The privacy of communication and correspondence

- Art. 32 refers to violation of constitutional rights. Whether or not the defendant’s act or
omission constitute a criminal offense, the aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely
separate and distinct civil action for damages and for such other relief. Such civil action shall
proceed independently or any criminal prosecution (if the latter be instituted) and may be
proved by a preponderance of evidence.

 Indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated.

 Good faith is not a defense.

 Judges cannot be subjected to liability, unless his act or omission constitutes a violation of the
Penal Code or other penal statute.