Damages

Erezo vs. Jepte

Facts
Jepte is the registered owner of a six by six truck. While said vehicle was being driven by Rodrigo
Espino, it collided with a taxi cab. As the truck went off the street, it hit Ernesto Jepte which resulted
to his death. Driver was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for homicide through reckless imprudence
and to pay the heirs of the deceased. As amount of judgment could not be enforced, plaintiff brought
an action against Jepte, the registered owner.

Issue
WON the registered owner of the vehicle is liable for injuries or damages caused by the driver.

Held
Registered owner of any vehicle, even if not used for public service, should primarily be responsible
to the public or third persons for injuries caused by the latter while the vehicle is being driven on the
highways or streets.
The principle upon which this doctrine is based is that in dealing with vehicles registered under the
Public Service Law, the public has the right to assume or presume that the registered owner is the
actual owner thereof, for it would be difficult for the public to enforce the actions that they may have
for injuries caused to them by vehicles being negligently operated if the public should be required to
prove who the actual owner is. A registered owner who has already sold or transferred a vehicle has
the recourse to a third-party complaint, in the same action brought against him to recover for the
damage or injury done, against the vendee or transferee of the vehicle.

Damages

MD Transit vs. CA

G.R. No. L-49496 May 31, 1979

Facts:
Carmen Mariano was recklessly hit while crossing the pedestrian lane by a bus. Thus, MD transit was
found civilly liable for having failed to exercise the diligence of a good father of a family in the
supervision of its driver. He was ordered to pay by the trial court, affirmed by the Ca, the amount of
P309,920.00 as compensatory damages for lost earnings, among others. The Supreme Court
reduced this to P200,000.00.
Issue: What are the basis/factors in the award of compensatory damages for lost earning capacity.
Held: The award is based on the two main factors of life expectancy and lost net earning capacity of
the deceased.
The Court stressed two factors in the award of such compensatory damages, to wit, (1) "life
expectancy is not only relevant but also an important element in fixing the amount recoverable" and
(2) "earning capacity, as an element of damages to one's estate for his death by wrongful act is
necessarily his net earning capacity or his capacity to acquire money, 'less the necessary expense
for his own living.' Stated otherwise, the amount recoverable is not loss of the entire earning, but
rather the loss of that portion of the earnings which the beneficiary would have received. In other
words, only net earnings, not gross earning, are to be considered, that is, the total of the earnings
less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings or income and less living and other
incidental expenses.