Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
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)
Negligence
omission of that diligence which is required by the
circumstances of persons, place and time
failure to observe that degree of care, precaution and
vigilance which the circumstances justly demand,
whereby such other person suffers injury
See
Corliss
v.
Manila
Railroad,
Valenzuela
v.
CA,
Li
v.
CA
TEST
TO
DETERMINE
WHETHER
OR
NOT
A
PERSON
IS
NEGLIGENT:
Would a prudent man (in his position) foresee harm to the
person injured as a reasonable consequence of the course
about to be pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty on the
actor to refrain from that course, or take precaution against
its mischievous results, and the failure to do so constitutes
negligence. Reasonable foresight of harm, followed by the
admonition born of this provision, is the constitutive fact of
negligence. (Picart v. Smith)
CULPA
AQUILIANA
CULPA
CRIMINAL
pre-existing
obligation
(contract)
no pre-existing
obligation
no pre-existing
obligation
preponderance of preponderance of
proof beyond
evidence
evidence
reasonable doubt
defense: good
defense: good
employer is
father of a family father of a family
subsidiarily
in the selection
in the selection
liable with his
and supervision and supervision
employee if the
of employees is
of employees
latter is insolvent
not a proper and
or incapable to
complete defense
pay he civil
(only mitigates
aspect
liability for
damages)
existence of
contract must be
proven if
contract not
complied with,
debtor is
presumed to be
at fault
fault of
negligence of the
defendant must
be proven
negligence is only
incidental to the
performance of
an existing
obligation
negligence is
direct,
substantive and
independent
innocence is
presumed until
the contrary is
proven
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
Defendant may claim that plaintiffs own negligence
contributed to his injury.
Effect: Only mitigation of award of damages
negligence is
direct,
substantive and
independent
PROXIMATE CAUSE
De[inition: that cause, which, in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any ef[icient intervening cause,
! of 8
1
!
APPLICATION
OF
2177
Situation:
Dennis, a cute 3 year-old baby, was run over by a
passenger jeepney resulting to his death. Arra is the owner
of the jeepney. Christian was the driver. The parents want to
sue. What are their options?
1. Sue Christian (driver) alone for homicide
through
reckless
imprudence.
Driver can be convicted of the crime and at the same
time be ordered to indemnify the parents. EVERY
PERSON CRIMINALLY LIABLE IS CIVILLY LIABLE.
Proof needed: GUILT OF DRIVER PROVEN BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT.
If driver acquitted, can parents of cute Dennis still sue
Christian for culpa aquiliana? YES. ACQUITTAL IS NOT
A BAR TO A SUBSEQUENT CIVIL ACTION. The evidence
in the criminal case may not be suf[icient for a
conviction, but suf[icient for a civil liability, where mere
preponderance of evidence is enough.
Parents sue both Arra (owner) and Christian (driver)
for culpa aquiliana? YES.
Owners defense: exercise of due diligence in the S&S of
driver; if proven excused from liability
Owner proves exercise of diligence, can driver still be
held liable? YES, if it was proven that OWNER WAS
ALSO IN THE JEEPNEY A THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT,
AND HE COULD HAVE, BY USE OF DILIGENCE,
PREVENTED THE MISFORTUNE, BUT HE DID NOT.
If driver convicted of criminal case, but cannot pay civil
liability (insolvent), who shall pay the victims ?
O W N E R . T H E G U I L T O F E M P L O Y E E I S
AUTOMATICALLY THE GUILT OF THE EMPLOYER.
2. Sue Arra (owner) and Christian (driver) for culpa
aquiliana.
Mere preponderance of evidence
Prove fault or negligence (elements) of driver
Can owner be excused from liability? YES, PROVIDED
HE PROVES THAT HE EXERCISED DUE DILIGENCE IN
CASO FORTUITO
Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly speci[ied 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.
VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA
that to which one consent does not make an injury in law
or that the victim assumed the risk of personal injury
proof: merely
preponderance of evidence
Similarities:
1. no pre-existing obligation
2. negligence is direct, substantive and independent of the
contract
Guilt of employee is
automatically the civil guilt
of the employer, if the
employee is insolvent
! of 8
2
!
If the criminal action is [iled after the said civil action has
already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended in
whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the
merits. The suspension shall last until [inal judgment is
rendered in the criminal action. Nevertheless, before
judgment on the merits is rendered in the civil action, the
same may, upon motion of the offended party, be
consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying the
criminal action. In case of consolidation, the evidence
already adduced in the civil action shall be deemed
automatically reproduced in the criminal action without
prejudice to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine
the witnesses presented by the offended party in the
criminal case and of the parties to present additional
evidence. The consolidated criminal and civil actions shall
be tried and decided jointly.
During the pendency of the criminal action, the running of
the period of prescription of the civil action which cannot
be instituted separately or whose proceeding has been
suspended shall be tolled. (n)
The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it
extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action based
on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a [inding
in a [inal judgment in the criminal action that the act or
omission from which the civil liability may arise did not
exist. (2a)
Section
3. When
civil
action
may
proceeded
independently. In the cases provided for in Articles 32,
33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the
independent civil action may be brought by the offended
party. It shall proceed independently of the criminal action
and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. In no
case, however, may the offended party recover damages
twice for the same act or omission charged in the criminal
action. (3a)
Section
4. Effect
of
death
on
civil
actions. The
death of the accused after arraignment and during the
pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the civil
liability arising from the delict. However, the independent
civil action instituted under section 3 of this Rule or which
thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from
other sources of obligation may be continued against the
estate or legal representative of the accused after proper
substitution or against said estate, as the case may be. The
heirs of the accused may be substituted for the deceased
without requiring the appointment of an executor or
administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad
litem for the minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or
representatives to appear and be substituted within a
period of thirty (30) days from notice.
A [inal judgment entered in favor of the offended party shall
be enforced in the manner especially provided in these
rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of the
deceased.
If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be
dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the offended
party may [ile against the estate of the deceased. (n)
PROCEDURAL
ASPECT
RULE
111
Prosecution
of
Civil
Action
Section
1. Institution
of
criminal
and
civil
actions.
(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action
for the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense
charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action
unless the offended party waives the civil action, reserves
the right to institute it separately or institutes the civil
action prior to the criminal action.
The reservation of the right to institute separately the civil
action shall be made before the prosecution starts
presenting its evidence and under circumstances affording
the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such
reservation.
When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability
against the accused by way of moral, nominal, temperate, or
exemplary damages without specifying the amount thereof
in the complaint or information, the [iling fees thereof shall
constitute a [irst lien on the judgment awarding such
damages.
Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is
speci[ied in the complaint or information, the
corresponding [iling fees shall be paid by the offended
party upon the [iling thereof in court.
Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no [iling fees
shall be required for actual damages.
No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint may
be [iled by the accused in the criminal case, but any cause of
action which could have been the subject thereof may be
litigated in a separate civil action. (1a)
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg.
22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding civil
action. No reservation to [ile such civil action separately
shall be allowed.
Upon [iling of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil actions,
the offended party shall pay in full the [iling fees based on
the amount of the check involved, which shall be
considered as the actual damages claimed. Where the
complaint or information also seeks to recover liquidated,
moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages, the
offended party shall pay additional [iling fees based on the
amounts alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged
but any of these damages are subsequently awarded by the
court, the [iling fees based on the amount awarded shall
constitute a [irst lien on the judgment.
Where the civil action has been [iled separately and trial
thereof has not yet commenced, it may be consolidated
with the criminal action upon application with the court
trying the latter case. If the application is granted, the trial
of both actions shall proceed in accordance with section 2
of this Rule governing consolidation of the civil and
criminal actions. (cir. 57-97)
Section
2. When
separate
civil
action
is
suspended.
After the criminal action has been commenced, the
separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be instituted
until [inal judgment has been entered in the criminal action.
Points to Remember:
1. Sec. 1(1), Rule 111 speci[ies that the civil action for
recovery of civil liability should arise from the offense
charged.
2. Independent civil actions (sec. 3) include those arising
from quasi-delicts provided in Art. 2176, CC, in addition
! of 8
3
!
hitting a store. Aran was hurt and also two other guys who
were eating in the store.
Bus liable to Aran for damages? YES, as long as Aran
can prove that he was a passenger thereof at the time
the accident and that he failed to reach his destination
safely, the bus is liable. (Defense for the bus: driver
observed extraordinary diligence)
Is the bus presumed negligent? Yes. A common carrier
is presumed negligent in case of death or physical
injuries of passenger unless it proves the exercise of
extraordinary diligence.
Can the two other injured [ile a case of contra
contractual against the bus? No. Culpa aquiliana is
proper against both the driver and the bus. They must
prove that the driver was negligent and that the bus did
not exercise diligence in the selection and supervision
of its driver. If bus can prove, it is exempted from
liability.
Failure of the two to prove negligence of the driver, no
culpa aquiliana, no quasi delict.
SITUATIONS
COVERED
First:
Plaintiffs own negligence was the immediate and
proximate cause of his injury. He cannot recover
damages.
Second: Plaintiffs own negligence is only contributory; and
the immediate and proximate cause of his injury is
defendants lack of due care. Plaintiff can recover
damages but the courts shall mitigate the damage to be
awarded.
Article
1173.
Two kinds of negligence
1. when an obligor does not observe diligence which is
required by the nature of the obligation and
corresponds with the circumstances of the persons,
time and place, there is fault or negligence.
2. 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 performance of the
obligation.
PROXIMATE
CAUSE
Cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence,
unbroken by any ef[icient intervening cause, produces the
injury, and without which the result would not have
occurred.
See
Phoenix
Construction,
Inc.
v.
IAC
CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENCE
Conduct on the part of the injured party, contributing as a
legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which falls below
the standard which he is required to conform for his own
protection. It is an act or omission amounting to want of
ordinary care on the part of the person injured which,
concurring with the defendants negligence, is the
proximate cause of the injury he suffered.
WHO
ARE
LIABLE?
NATURE
OF
LIABILITY
FOR
DAMAGES
CAUSED
BY
Father or mother
liable for
damages
Solidary liability
minor children
who live in their
company
Guaridan
liable for
damages
minors or
incapacitated
persons who are
under their
authority and live
in their company
Owners and
managers of
establishment or
enterprise
liable for
damages
employees
employers
liable for
damages
employees and
household
helpers acting
within the scope
of their assigned
tasks
state
liable for
damages
special agents
BUT NOT when
the damage has
been caused by
the of[icial to
whom the task
done properly
pertains, in
which case Art.
21776 applies
Teachers or
heads of
establishments of
arts and trades
liable for
damages
pupils and
students or
apprentices, so
long as they
remain in their
custody
AVAILABLE
DEFENSE
Diligence of a good father of a family
SPECIAL
AGENT
Specially commissioned to carry out the acts complained of
outside of such agents regular duties.
SITUATION
LIABILITY
driver is disputable
PRESUMED negligent
Art.
2186.
Every
owner
of
a
motor
vehicle
shall
_ile
with
the
proper
government
of_ice
a
bond
executed
by
a
government-
controlled
corporation
or
of_ice,
to
answer
for
damages
to
third
persons.
The
amount
of
the
bond
and
other
terms
shall
be
_ixed
by
the
competent
public
of_icial.
(n)
! of 8
8
!