H.

REASONABLE OR JUSTIFIABLE RELIANCE

1. Any physician or surgeon who, in connection, with the practice of his profession, shall issue a false

The recipient of a fraudulent misrepresentation can recover against its maker for pecuniary loss resulting

certificate; and

from it if, but only if,

2. Any public officer who shall issue a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar

I.

(a)

he relies on the misrepresentation in acting or refraining from action, and

circumstances.

(b)

his reliance is justifiable.

Art. 175. Using false certificates.

GOOD SAMARITAN ACT: Good Samaritan doctrine is used by rescuers to avoid civil liability for injuries

Art. 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of abortives. The penalties

arising from their negligence. Its purpose is to encourage emergency assistance by removing the threat

provided in Article 256 shall be imposed in its maximum period, respectively, upon any physician or

of liability for damage done by the assistance. However, the assistance must be reasonable; a rescuer

midwife who, taking advantage of their scientific knowledge or skill, shall cause an abortion or assist in

cannot benefit from the Good Samaritan doctrine if the assistance is reckless or grossly negligent. Three

causing the same. virtual law library

key elements support a successful invocation of the Good Samaritan doctrine:

Any pharmacist who, without the proper prescription from a physician, shall dispense any abortive shall

(1)

the care rendered was performed as the result of the emergency,

suffer arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

(2)

the initial emergency or injury was not caused by the person invoking the defense, and

Art. 347. Simulation of births, substitution of one child for another and concealment or abandonment of a

(3)

the emergency care was not given in a grossly negligent or reckless manner.

legitimate child.

J. PHYSICIAN-PATIENT CONFIDENTIALITY PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATION - RULE 130 Section 24 (c), Section

Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act

27

which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony xxx Reckless imprudence consists in

Section 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication. The following persons cannot

voluntary, but without malice, doing or falling to do an act from which material damage results by reason

testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:

of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing of failing to perform such act,

(c)

Section 27.

A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case,

taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and

without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by

other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.

him or any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a

Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in which the damage

professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity,

impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.

and which would blacken the reputation of the patient;

RA 9165 - Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (difference between 18 and 19)

Offer of compromise not admissible. In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an

Section 18. Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous Drugs. The penalty of imprisonment

admission of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror.

ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging

In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to

from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos

be compromised, an offer of compromised by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied

(P500,000.00) and the additional penalty of the revocation of his/her license to practice

admission of guilt.

shall be imposed upon the practitioner, who shall prescribe any dangerous drug to any

A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to lesser offense, is not

person whose physical or physiological condition does not require the use or in the

admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea or offer.

dosage prescribed therein, as determined by the Board in consultation with recognized

An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by an injury is not

competent experts who are authorized representatives of professional organizations of

admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury.

Elements:

practitioners, particularly those who are involved in the care of persons with severe pain.

1. must be a civil case

Section 19. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs. The penalty of life imprisonment

2. must be a medical practitioner

to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten

3. info discovered while in his professional capacity

million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless

4. discovery will blacken reputation

authorized by law, shall make or issue a prescription or any other writing purporting to be

- if theres a 3rd person who is present, cannot be invoked.

K. DEFENSES: Standard Negligence Defenses:

a prescription for any dangerous drug.

RA 7170 - Organ Donation Act of 1991 - Section 8. Manner of Executing a Legacy.

1.

Contributory Negligence

2.

Respectable Minority Principle - not practicing within the standard of care of the majority

will. The legacy becomes effective upon the death of the testator without waiting

is excusable if it can be shown that a respectable minority of physicians practice in the

for probate of the will. If the will is not probated, or if it is declared invalid for

standard of question

testamentary purposes, the legacy, to the extent that it was executed in good

3.

4.

(a)

Statute of Limitations - a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of

Legacy of all or part of the human body under Section 3 hereof may be made by

faith, is nevertheless valid and effective.

certain kinds of legal action. (too late to sue your doctor)

RA 7885 - AN ACT TO ADVANCE CORNEAL TRANSPLANTATION IN THE PHILIPPINES - "In the absence of

Good Samaritan

any persons specified under Sec. 4 hereof and in the absence of any document of organ donation, the
physician in charge of the patient, the head of the hospital or a designated officer of the hospital who

Rejection of Expert Testimony EWAN, An Experts Qualifications. EWAN, Reliability of an Experts Opinion.
EWAN, Reduction or Elimination of Damages EWAN, Absence of Causation EWAN
Prescription of crimes art 71 RPC penalties parang mali
Art. 1146. The following actions must be instituted within four years:
(1) Upon an injury to the rights of the plaintiff;
(2) Upon a quasi-delict;
BORROWED SERVANT DOCTRINE - This doctrine provides that once the surgeon enters the operating
room and takes charge of the proceedings, the acts or omissions of operating room personnel, and any
negligence associated with such acts or omissions, are imputable to the surgeon.
L. RA 8504 ARTICLE VI Sec. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34
Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998
ARTICLE VI: CONFIDENTIALITY
Section 30. - Medical confidentiality
Section 31. Exceptions to the mandate of confidentiality
Section 32. Release of HIV/AIDS test results
Section 33. Penalties for violations of confidentiality
Section 34. Disclosure to sexual partners.
M. STANDARD OF CARE: How is the Standard of Care Determined?
National Standard of Care Locality Rule
Respectable Minority Rule
Modified locality rule
Customary Versus Accepted Medical Standards of Care
Cause-in-fact is determined by the "but for" test:

has custody of the body of the deceased classified as accident, trauma, or other medico-legal cases,
may authorize in a public document the removal from such body for the purpose of transplantation of
the organ to the body of a living person: provided, that the physician, head of the hospital or officer
designated by the hospital for this purpose has exerted reasonable efforts, within forty-eight (48) hours,
to locate the nearest relative listed in Sec. 4 hereof or guardian of the decedent at the time of death:
provided, however, that the said physician, head or designated officer of the hospital, or the medicolegal officer of any government agency which has custody of such body may authorize the removal of
the cornea or corneas of the decedent within twelve (12) hours after death and upon the request of
qualified legatees or donees for the sole purpose of transplantation: provided, that such removal of the
cornea or corneas will not interfere with any subsequent investigation or alter the post-mortem facial
appearance of the decedent by such means as placing eye caps after the said cornea or corneas have
been removed.
DR. FILOTEO A. ALANO vs. ZENAIDA MAGUD-LOGMAO exerted efforts to locate relatives within 48
hours.
RA 4226 - Hospital Licensure Act
RA 9439 - AN ACT PROHIBITING THE DETENTION OF PATIENTS IN HOSPITALS AND MEDICAL CLINICS ON
GROUNDS OF NONPAYMENT OF HOSPITAL BILLS OR MEDICAL EXPENSES
RA 8344 - AN ACT PENALIZING THE REFUSAL OF HOSPITALS AND MEDICAL CLINICS TO ADMINISTER
APPROPRIATE INITIAL MEDICAL TREATMENT AND SUPPORT IN EMERGENCY OR SERIOUS CASES,
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE BATAS PAMBANSA BILANG 702, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS "AN ACT
PROHIBITING THE DEMAND OF DEPOSITS OR ADVANCE PAYMENTS FOR THE CONFINEMENT OR
TREATMENT OF PATIENTS IN HOSPITALS AND MEDICAL CLINICS IN CERTAIN CASES"
RA 6615 - AN ACT REQUIRING GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE HOSPITALS AND CLINICS TO EXTEND MEDICAL
ASSISTANCE IN EMERGENCY CASES

Proximate Cause - is defined as that cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by
any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have

V. CASES:

occurred.

MANILA DOCTORS HOSPITAL vs SO UN CHUA and TY - that it shall be unlawful for any hospital or medical

CAUSATION-DIFFERENCE BET BUT FOR TEST AND SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR TEST

O. RPC: Art. 174, 175, 259, 347, 365
Art. 174. False medical certificates, false certificates of merits or service, etc.

clinic to cause directly or indirectly the detention of patients for non-payment, in part or in full, of their
hospital bills, and, furthermore, requires patients who have fully recovered and are financially incapable

to settle the hospitalization expenses to execute a promissory note, co-signed by another individual, to

Any less serious physical injuries inflicted upon the offender's parents, ascendants, guardians, curators,

the extent of the unpaid obligation before leaving the hospital.

teachers, or persons of rank, or persons in authority, shall be punished by prision correccional in its

PRC vs. DE GUZMAN et al - Section 26 of the Medical Act of 1959 provides for the administrative and

minimum and medium periods, provided that, in the case of persons in authority, the deed does not

judicial remedies that respondents herein can avail to question Resolution No. 26 of the Board of

constitute the crime of assault upon such person.

Medicine, namely: (a) appeal the unfavorable judgment to the PRC; (b) should the PRC ruling still be

Art. 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. The crime of slight physical injuries shall be

unfavorable, to elevate the matter on appeal to the Office of the President; and (c) should they still be

punished:

unsatisfied, to ask for a review of the case or to bring the case to court via a special civil action of

1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate the

certiorari. Thus, as a rule, mandamus will not lie when administrative remedies are still available.

offended party for labor from one to nine days, or shall require medical attendance during the same

However, the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply where, as in this case, a

period.

pure question of law is raised

2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos and censure when the offender has caused

On foreign doctors:

physical injuries which do not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual work nor require

1.

must have authority from Board, permit

medical assistance.

2.

must be doctor in his country

3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-

3.

must be temporary

treat another by deed without causing any injury.

RPC PHYSICAL INJURIES Art. 262, 263, 264, 265, 266 - Chapter Two: PHYSICAL INJURIES (intent!!)

Double Jeopardy = The rule on double jeopardy means that when a person is charged with an offense

Art. 262. Mutilation. The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon

and the case is terminated either by conviction or acquittal, or in any other manner without the

any person who shall intentionally mutilate another by depriving him, either totally or partially, or some

consent of the accused, the latter cannot again be charged with the same or identical offense.

essential organ of reproduction.

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES FOR THE ACCUSED TO RAISE THE DEFENSE OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY?

Any other intentional mutilation shall be punished by prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods.

1.

Art. 263. Serious physical injuries. Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be

2.

The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated

guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries and shall suffer:

3.

The second jeopardy must be for the same offense or the second offense includes or is necessarily

1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the injured person

included in the offense charged in the first information or is an attempt to commit the offense or a

shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind;

frustration thereof.

2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if in consequence of the

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES FOR THE FIRST JEOPARDY TO ATTACH?

physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to

1.

There is a valid complaint or information

smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such

2.

Court of competent jurisdiction

member, or shall have become incapacitated for the work in which he was therefor habitually engaged;

3.

Arraignment

3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if in consequence of the

4.

Plea

physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have become deformed, or shall have lost any other

5.

The defendant is acquitted, convicted, or the case was dismissed or terminated without his express

part of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the

consent

A first jeopardy must have validly attached prior to the second

performance of the work in which he as habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety days;
4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if
the physical injuries inflicted shall have caused the illness or incapacity for labor of the injured person for
more than thirty days.
If the offense shall have been committed against any of the persons enumerated in Article 246, or with
attendance of any of the circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case covered by subdivision
number 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum periods;
the case covered by subdivision number 2 by prision correccional in its maximum period to prision
mayor in its minimum period; the case covered by subdivision number 3 by prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods; and the case covered by subdivision number 4 by prision correccional in
its minimum and medium periods.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical
injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement.
Art. 264. Administering injurious substances or beverages. The penalties established by the next
preceding article shall be applicable in the respective case to any person who, without intent to kill, shall
inflict upon another any serious, physical injury, by knowingly administering to him any injurious
substance or beverages or by taking advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity.
Art. 265. Less serious physical injuries. Any person who shall inflict upon another physical injuries not
described in the preceding articles, but which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor for ten days
or more, or shall require medical assistance for the same period, shall be guilty of less serious physical
injuries and shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.
Whenever less serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted with the manifest intent to kill or offend
the injured person, or under circumstances adding ignominy to the offense in addition to the penalty of
arresto mayor, a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed.

N.B:

The judgment should not only be final and executory but also be promulgated before there

could be a valid jeopardy.

X. CASES: (mostly on no supervening act, or not a supervening event
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. BULING ask supervening
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. YORAC - ask supervening
PEOPLE vs. ADIL and FAMA, JR. - ask supervening
ENRILE AND ENRILE vs. MANALASTAS - the presentation of the medical certificates to prove the duration
of the victims need for medical attendance or of their incapacity should take place only at the trial, not
before or during the preliminary investigation.
AGUIRRE vs. SECRETARY OF DOJ mutilation, there must be intent
THE PEOPLE vs. OCAYA - COURTS; JURISDICTION; MEDICAL CERTIFICATE; DURATION OF TREATMENT OF
THE INJURY AS INDICATED IN THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DOES NOT CONFER JURISDICTION UPON THE
COURT. Respondent judge committed a grave abuse of discretion in precipitately dismissing the case
for alleged lack of jurisdiction on the mere basis of his totally wrong notion that what governs in the filing
of a physical injury case is the medical certificate regarding the duration of treatment and "not what the
victim declares because the same is self-serving."cr
BONGALON vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES - Not every instance of the laying of hands on a child
constitutes the crime of child abuse under Section 10 (a) of Republic Act No. 7610. Only when the laying
of hands is shown beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the accused to debase, degrade or
demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being should it be punished as child
abuse. Otherwise, it is punished under the Revised Penal Code.