HUMAN RELATIONS

Interaction or interrelation of one person to another

person or persons and vice versa, in accordance with
mores, habits, customs and public policy no contrary to
laws.
Article 19:
Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and
in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due, and observe honesty and
good faith.
Article 19 has been called abuse of rights. If a person
acts with abuse, his right to act ceases, and his act
becomes illicit, giving rise to liability
Limitations:
1. The intrinsic limitations which emanate from
the right itself;
2. Extrinsic limitations;
a. Those derived from the nature of the
right;
b. Limitations arising from good faith;
c. Limitations imposed by the economic and
social ends of the right;
Classical theory he who uses a right injures no one
Reason: the exercise of a right ends when the right
disappears, and it disappears when it is abused,
especially to prejudice others.
Test of abuse of Rights
When it is exercised for the only purpose of prejudicing
or injuring another.
Elements of Abuse of Rights:
1. Exercise of a right which is objective and
apparently legal;
2. Damage or injury to an interest not specifically
protected by a legal precept;
3. Immorality or anti-social character of the
damage or injury manifested either
subjectively.
Elements under Art. 19:
1. There is a legal right or duty;
2. Which is exercised in bad faith;
3. For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring
another.
Example:
1. Issuing midnight appointment was an abuse of
presidential prerogatives;
2. Illegal dismissal in labor cases. There must be
lawful and authorized causes.
3. Employee or government officer is dishonest
or is guilty of oppression.
Art. 20: Every person who, contrary to law, willfully
or negligently causes damage to another, shall
indemnify the latter for the same
This article serves as a sanction to all violations of right
If someone be damaged, he does not necessarily have
the right to be indemnified. It is necessary that some of
his right is impaired.
Prizes in a contest does not have demandable rights it is
only a mere privilege, unless the proclaimed by the
judges. Judiciary has no power to reverse the award
even the decision be erroneous.
Art. 21: Any person who willfully causes loss or
injury to another in a manner that it is contrary to
morals, good customs, or public policy shall
compensate the latter for the damage.

1. Liability without violation of law.

If act, loss, or injury is caused in a manner that
it is contrary to morals or good customs, or
public policy.
2. Loss or injury.
Injury suffered refers to any determinate right
or property, whether material or otherwise.
Willfulness and contravention to morals or
public policy must be present.
3. Willfully Caused.
Done willfully when done with knowledge if
its injurious effect.
Example: 19 year old got pregnant and promise to
marry has not been made. No crime committed but may
be held liable under Art. 21.
Breach of Promise to Marry
Violation of an agreement to marry each other
made between a man and a woman.
Alienation of affection
Actionable wrong if causing to married man
the loss of consortium, that is the loss of wifes
society, affections and assistance.
When Damage Recoverable in Breach of Promise to
Marry
1. If breach of promise to marry is accompanied
by a tortious act, i.e. a quasi-delict;
2. If the breach is accompanied by a quasicontract as when on the strength of the
promise to marry money or property is given.
An action, will lie to recover such money or
property;
3. If the breach constitutes an abuse of right.
GL: there can be no recovery of moral damages for
breach of promise to marry. Otherwise, many men may
become the victims of designing and unscrupulous
females.
EX: Case of Hermosisima: if there be seduction (RPC),
moral damages may be recovered.
Case of Wassmer v. Velez: formally set a wedding and go
through all the preparation, only to walk out of it when
the marriage is about to be solemnized
Art. 22: Every person who through an act of
performance by another, or any other means,
acquires or comes into possession of something at
the expense of the latter without just or legal
ground, shall return the same to him.
No man ought to be made rich out of anothers injury
Requisites of An Accion in Rem Verso:
1. One party must be enriched and the other
made poorer;
2. There must be a casual relation between the
two;
3. The enrichment must not be justifiable;
4. There must be no other way to recover;
5. The indemnity cannot exceed the loss of
enrichment whichever is less.
Example:
A debt already paid and receipt was given, later on, he
was again asked to pay, could not find the receipt, and
paid again. Found the missing receipt he can still get
back what he had paid.
Unjust enrichment when there is no duty to pay and
the person who receives the payment has no right to
receive it.
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.

married man, even if there be no carnal relations,

disturbs his family life, and damages may therefore be
asked.

Liability without fault, based on equity.

Example: a flood drove As cattle to the cornfield owned
by B. As cattle are saved but Bs crops are destroyed. No
fault on A but he was benefited. A should indemnify B.

c. Intriguing to cause another - includes gossiping, and

reliance on hearsay;

Art. 24. In all contractual, property or other

relations, when one of the parties is at a
disadvantage on account of his moral dependence,
ignorance, indigence, mental weakness, tender age
or other handicap, the courts must be vigilant for
his protection.
An article protecting the weaker party or the underdog.
Vigilant for his protection
The doubt should be resolved in favor of the
underdog.

d. Vexing or humiliating - includes criticism of ones

health or features without justifiable cause. Religious
freedom does not authorize anyone to heap and repute
upon another by reason of latters religion.
Art. 27. 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.
Rationale: Theory of Public office is a public trust

Example:
Workmens Compensation Act which give relief to labor
in case of injury.
The right to fire employees must not be abused.
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.
Person who can file an action under this article are:
1. Any government institution;
2. Any private charitable institution.
Only the courts upon proper action can order the
stopping of this ostentatious display of wealth.
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 relief:
(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 his
religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth,
physical defect, or other personal condition.
The principal rights protected under this article are the
following:
1. Right to personal dignity;
2. Right to personal security;
3. Right to family relations;
4. Right to social intercourse;
5. Right to security;
6. Right to peace of mind
a. Prying into the privacy of anothers residence- this
includes respect for anothers name, picture, or
personality except insofar as is needed for publication
of information and pictures of legitimate news value;
b. Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family
relations of another - includes alienation of the affecting
of the husband wife. Thus, a girl who makes love to a

Requisites:
1. That the defendant be a public official charged
with the performance of official duties;
2. That there be a violation of an official duty in
favor of an individual;
3. That there be a willfulness or negligence in the
violation of such official duty;
4. That there be an injury to the individual
Instances where there is No liability under this article:
1. Impossibility of performance
No funds provided with which an officer could
obey an ordinance requiring the removal of
refuse from private property.
2. Contributory negligence of plaintiff
3. When ministerial officer vested with no
discretion
Ex: A police who instead of giving legal assistance
to the victim, intimidates and harasses said victim
A town mayor who consistently absent from
council sessions
Art. 28. 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. 28 is necessary in a system of free enterprise.
RA 166 defines unfair competition as any person who
shall make any false statement in the course of trade or
who shall commit any other act contrary to good faith of
a nature calculated to discredit the goods, business, or
services.
The concept of unfair competition under art. 28 is
broader than that RA 166, in the former the term covers
even cases of discovery of trade secretes, bribery of his
employees, misrepresentation of all kinds, interference
with the fulfillment of a competitors contracts
Unfair competition may constitute a criminal offense,
and every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable.
Elements of unfair competition:
1. That the offender gives his goods the general
appearance of the goods of another
manufacturer or dealer;
2. That the general appearance is shown in the
goods themselves, or in the wrapping of their

3.

4.

packages, or in the device or words therein or

in any other feature of their appearance;
That the offender offers to sell or sells those
goods or gives other persons a chance or
opportunity to do the same with a like
purpose;
That there is actual intent to deceive the public
or defraud a competition.

Unfair competition is not applicable to education

Nature of a complaint for unfair competition
A complaint for UC is basically a suit for
injunction and damages.
Injunction, for the purpose of enjoining the
unlawful competition from proceeding further
Damages, in order to allow the aggrieved party
to recover the damage has suffered by reason
of UC.
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.
the provision allows the filing of a civil action for
damages even though the accused has been acquitted
on reasonable doubt.
In res adjudication, no civil action may be instituted If
the accused acquitted on the ground that he did not
commit the act, or that no crime was committed, or he is
justified or except.
If civil action is instituted, only preponderance of
evidence is required.
Other Causes for Recovery:
In estafa, may be acquitted by lack of interest, or no
criminal act committed, an action to recover would be
against the accused. The civil action may be based on
quasi-delict or unjust enrichment.
Other Doctrines Under this Article:
In Republic vs Patanan, the latter was acquitted in a
criminal case for failure to pay income tax. Later the
government sued him civilly for the collection of tax
due. Acquittal in criminal case is not important,.
Manantan vs CA:
Two kinds of acquittal:
1. The accused is not the author of the act or
omission complained of;
2. Based on reasonable doubt on the guilt of the
accused.
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.
This provision authorizes the institution of civil action
for damages arising out of a criminal offense before a
criminal action is instituted for the criminal offense.

Example: X accused Y of stealing Xs cow, he brought a

civil action against Y to get the cow plus damages. If
information is filed against Y, the civil action is
suspended.
Art. 31. When the civil action is based on an
obligation not arising from the act or omission
complained of as a felony, such civil action may
proceed independently of the criminal proceedings
and regardless of the result of the latter.
This provision refers to civil action based not on the act
or omission, but on an obligation arising such law or
contract.
Ex: Beranles vs Bohol Land Transpiration
Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint on the
ground that the defendants driver had been acquitted
in the criminal offense. Civil action on contractual
liability of a common carrier is distinct from the
criminal action instituted against the carrier on latters
criminal negligence.
Independent Civil Action one that is brought distinctly
and separately from a criminal case for consideration of
public policy.
Art. 31, 32, 33, 34 and 2177 gives instances of
Independent civil action.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Art. 31 the obligation does not arise from a

crime, but some other act;
Art. 32 breach of constitutional and other
rights;
Art. 33 defamation, fraud, physical injuries;
Art. 34 refusal or failure of city or mun police
to give protection;
Art. 2177 Quasi delict or culpa acquiliana

Art. 32. 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:
(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 the equal protection of the laws;
(9) The right to be secure in one's person, house,
papers, and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures;
(10) The liberty of abode and of changing the same;
(11) The privacy of communication and
correspondence;
(12) The right to become a member of associations
or societies for purposes not contrary to law;
(13) The right to take part in a peaceable assembly
to petition the government for redress of
grievances;
(14) The right to be free from involuntary servitude
in any form;
(15) The right of the accused against excessive bail;
(16) The right of the accused to be heard by himself
and counsel, to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him, to have a
speedy and public trial, to meet the witnesses
face to face, and to have compulsory process to
secure the attendance of witness in his behalf;

(17) Freedom from being compelled to be a witness

against one's self, or from being forced to
confess guilt, or from being induced by a
promise of immunity or reward to make such
confession, except when the person confessing
becomes a State witness;
(18) Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel and
unusual punishment, unless the same is
imposed or inflicted in accordance with a
statute which has not been judicially declared
unconstitutional; and
(19) Freedom of access to the courts.
In any of the cases referred to in this article,
whether or not the 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. Such civil action shall proceed independently
of any criminal prosecution (if the latter be
instituted), and mat be proved by a preponderance
of evidence.
The indemnity shall include moral damages.
Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated.
The responsibility herein set forth is not
demandable from a judge unless his act or omission
constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or other
penal statute.
In any cases, whether the defendant commits a criminal
offense, the aggrieved party has a right to commence an
entirely separate and distinct civil actions for damages.
Reason for this article:
Essential to the effective maintenance of democracy
According to Justice Paras, the reasons fir ICA are the
following;
1. The fiscal is afraid to prosecute a fellow public
official and citizen may be left behind without
redress;
2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt requires
much harder to comply with a mere
preponderance of evidence;
3. The are many unconstitutional acts which are
not yet made crimes.
Reserving Right to File a Separate Civil Action
The fact that the complainant did not reserve her right
to file SCA in criminal case, does not preclude her from
bring such action,
Art. 33. 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.
GR: when a criminal action is instituted, the civil action
for recovery of civil liability is impliedly instituted,
unless the offended party reserves to institute it
separately
EX: Art. 33, civil action may be filed independently of
the criminal, even if there has been no reservation
made.
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.
Subsidiary liability may be imposed only when the
guilty officer is insolvent. Cannot be avoided by proving
due diligence in selecting employees.
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 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.
This article applies to cases when there is no
independent civil action.
Art. 36. Pre-judicial questions which must be
decided before any criminal prosecution may be
instituted or may proceed, shall be governed by
rules of court which the Supreme Court shall
promulgate and which shall not be in conflict with
the provisions of this Code.
Prejudicial Question one must be decided before the
criminal case can be successfully prosecuted, or dispute
purely civil in character but the connected in such a
manner to the crime on criminal case is based that it is
determinative of guilt or innocence of the accused.
Following cases:
1. Action for bigamy, accused claims that the first
marriage is null and void, and the right to
deceived such validity is vested with another
tribunal, the civil action must first be decided
before the action for bigamy can proceed.
Other Doctrines;
1. In a criminal case for damage to ones
property, a civil action that involved the
ownership of said property should first be
resolved.
2. Obligation to pay wages is a prejudicial
question to a criminal prosecution for delay in
the payment of such wages
When will Suspension of Criminal Case be Asked For.
The time to ask is not during the period of preliminary
investigation but after the fiscal shall have finished such
investigation and filed the criminal information.
Who May Raise the Issue of PQ
The defendant in a criminal case and not the
prosecution.