Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

In Antonio Diaz v. Davao Light & Power Corp., et al., G.R. No.

160959, April 4, 2007 some motives or interest or ill-will that partakes of the nature of fraud. Malice connotes
(Callejo, J), petitioner unilaterally installed a meter to replace another one. There was a ill-will or spite and speaks not in response to duty. It implies an intention to do ulterior and
notice of disconnection and eventually, the connection was cut. There was a petition unjustifiable harm. Malice is bad faith or bad motive.
for mandatory injunction to restore connection. It was however settled by way of a
compromise agreement where the parties agreed to reduce the respondent’s claim There was no malice or bad faith. Petitioner himself alleged in his complaint that he
and to waive the counterclaim and to install the electric service. There was no unilaterally installed a meter after it was removed by DLPC. No less than the Court,
agreement to bar the institution of other action. Thereafter, respondent filed criminal admonished petitioner and reminded him that connections of electrical service and
cases for theft against the petitioner, hence, a complaint for damages for abuse of right installations of electric meters should always be upon mutual contract of the parties,
under Article 19, NCC was filed. and that payments for electrical consumption should also be made promptly whenever
due. Based on these established facts, petitioner has not shown that the acts of
Petitioner insisted that the compromise agreement as well as the decision based on it respondent were done with the sole intent of prejudicing and injuring him.
already settled the controversies between them; yet, DLPC instituted the theft case
against petitioner, and worse, instituted another action for violation of P.D. 401, as Petitioner may have suffered damages as a result of the filing of the complaints.
amended by B.P. 876. Thus, the only conclusion that can be inferred from the acts of However, there is a material distinction between damages and injury. Injury is the illegal
DLPC is that they were designed to harass, embarrass, prejudice, and ruin him. He invasion of a legal right; damage is the loss, hurt or harm which results from the injury;
further averred that the compromise agreement in civil case completely erased litigious and damages are the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage
matters that could necessarily arise out of either Electric Meter No. 84737 or 86673509. suffered. Thus, there can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or
Moreover, he asserted that the evidence he presented is sufficient to prove the harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the consequences
damages he suffered by reason of the malicious institution of the criminal cases. In must be borne by the injured person alone; the law affords no remedy for damages
brushing aside his contentions, the SC resulting from an act which does not amount to a legal injury or wrong. These situations
are often called damnum absque injuria. (Far East Bank and Trust Company v. Pacilan,
Held: Article 2028 of the Civil Code defines a compromise as a contract whereby the Jr., G.R. No. 157314, July 29, 2005, 465 SCRA 372, 384-385). Whatever damages petitioner
parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation or put an end to one already may have suffered would have to be borne by him alone since it was his acts which led
commenced. The purpose of compromise is to settle the claims of the parties and bar to the filing of the complaints against him.
all future disputes and controversies. However, criminal liability is not affected by
compromise for it is a public offense which must be prosecuted and punished by the Felix Abe, et al vs Foster Wheeler Corp. & Caltex Inc.
Government on its own motion, though complete reparation should have been made GR NO. L-14785 & L-14923
of the damages suffered by the offended party. A criminal case is committed against Barrera, J.p.
the People, and the offended party may not waive or extinguish the criminal liability
that the law imposes for the commission of the offense. Moreover, a compromise is not Nature of the Case
one of the grounds prescribed by the Revised Penal Code for the extinction of criminal An appeal before the SC against the CA’s decision affirming the conviction of the
liability. accused by the RTC of Bacolod.

Petitioner is not entitled to damages under Articles 19, 20 and 21, and Article 2217 and FACTS
2219(8) of the New Civil Code.
This is a consolidated criminal case nos. (1)95-17070- Murder; (2)95-17071- Homicide
The elements of abuse of rights are the following: (a) the existence of a legal right or against the accused-appellant, who killed Edmund Prayco and Leopoldo Guiro
duty; (b) which is exercise in bad faith; and (c) for the sole intent of prejudicing or respectively on March 16, 1995 in the Municipality of Murcia, Negros Occidental. The
injuring another. (Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp., Limited v. Catalan, G.R. No. accused appellant has said to have used a firearm, with treachery, with intent to kill
159591, October 18, 2004, 440 SCRA 498, 511-512; Saber v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. and taking advantage of nighttime, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and
132981, August 31, 2004, 437 SCRA 259). Thus, malice or bad faith is at the core of the feloniously attack, assault and shoot the victims.
above provisions. Good faith refers to the state of the mind which is manifested by the
acts of the individual concerned. In consists of the intention to abstain from taking an On July 2, 2003, the RTC of Bacolod City convicted the accused-appellant, Jose Pepito
unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of another. Good faith is presumed and Combate in crime of Homicide with the penalty of RECLUSION TEMPORAL in its medium
he who alleges bad faith has the duty to prove the same. Bad faith, on the other hand, period and payment of indemnity, compensatory damages, reimbursement of burial
does not simply connote bad judgment to simple negligence, dishonest purpose or expenses to the heirs of Guiro & moral damages; and in the crime of Murder with the
some moral obloquy and conscious doing of a wrong, a breach of known duty due to
penalty of Reclusion perpetua and payment of indemnity and compensatory damages In People v. Osias:
to the heirs of Prayco. “It is perfectly reasonable to believe the testimony of a witness with respect to some
facts and disbelieve it with respect to other facts. And it has been aptly said that even
On January 30, 2008, the CA affirmed the assailed judgment of the lower court and when witnesses are found to have deliberately falsified in some material particulars, it is
modified the award of damages which deleted the compensatory damages in both not required that the whole of their uncorroborated testimony be rejected but such
cases thus, awarding exemplary damages of P25, 000.00 to heirs of Leopoldo Guiro and portions thereof deemed worthy of belief may be credited.”
awarding the same to heirs of Edmund Prayco.
The primordial consideration is that the witness was present at the scene of the crime
The judgment of the RTC- Bacolod which was affirmed by the CA was then questioned and that he positively identified [the accused] as one of the perpetrators of the crime
by accused-appelant, Jose Combate that the trial court erred in convicting him of the charged.
crimes of homicide and murder, despite the fact that his guilt was not proved beyond
reasonable doubt because of the inconsistencies of the testimonies of the witness of the POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION PREVAILS OVER DEFENSE OF DENIAL
prosecution and those inconsistencies will erode the credibility of the witness. The Categorical and consistent positive identification, absent any showing of ill motive on
accused-appellant said that there was a failure of the lower court to. the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over the defense of denial.
Accused-appellant was positively and categorically identified by the witnesses. They
ISSUE/s have no reason to perjure and accused-appellant was unable to prove that the
prosecution witnesses were moved by any consideration other than to see that justice is
Whether or not the RTC of Bacolod erred in convicting the accused of the crime done. Thus, the presumption that their testimonies were not moved by any ill will and
homicide & Murder despite the fact that his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable bias stands, and, therefore, their testimonies are entitled to full faith and credit.
doubt.
The court then stated WHAT MAY BE RECOVERED WHEN DEATH OCCURS.
RULING When death occurs due to a crime, the following may be recovered: (1) civil
indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim; (2) actual or compensatory damages;
NO. The following doctrines were then referred to by the court in its decision. (3) moral damages; (4) exemplary damages; (5) attorney’s fees and expenses of
litigation; and (6) interest, in proper cases.[10][59] InPeople v. Tubongbanua,[11][60] interest
The Factual findings of the court should be respected. at the rate of six percent (6%) was ordered to be applied on the award of damages.
Time-tested is the doctrine that the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of a witness This rule would be subsequently applied by the Court in several cases such
is entitled to great weight, sometimes even with finality. The Supreme Court will not asMendoza v. People,[12][61] People v. Buban,[13][62] People v. Guevarra,[14][63] and People
interfere with that assessment, absent any indication that the lower court has v. Regalario.[15][64] Thus, we likewise adopt this rule in the instant case. Interest of six
overlooked some material facts or gravely abused its discretion. percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the award of civil indemnity and all
damages, i.e., actual or compensatory damages, moral damages and exemplary
Minor and insignificant inconsistencies bolster credibility damages, from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.
Complementing the above doctrine is the equally established rule that minor and Dario Nacar vs Gallery Frames
insignificant inconsistencies in the testimony tend to bolster, rather than weaken, the
credibility of witnesses, for they show that the testimony is not contrived or rehearsed. As 703 SCRA 439 – Civil Law – Torts and Damages – Actual and Compensatory Damages –
the Court put it in People v. Cristobal, “Trivial inconsistencies do not rock the pedestal Legal Rate of Interest is now 6%
upon which the credibility of the witness rests, but enhances credibility as they manifest Labor Law – Labor Relations – Illegal Dismissal – Computation of Monetary Benefits
spontaneity and lack of scheming.”
Dario Nacar filed a labor case against Gallery Frames and its owner Felipe Bordey, Jr.
Nacar alleged that he was dismissed without cause by Gallery Frames on January 24,
Testimony of a witness must be considered with entirety.
1997. On October 15, 1998, the Labor Arbiter (LA) found Gallery Frames guilty of illegal
The testimony of a witness must be considered in its entirety and not merely on its dismissal hence the Arbiter awarded Nacar P158,919.92 in damages consisting of
truncated parts. The technique in deciphering a testimony is not to consider only its backwages and separation pay.
isolated parts and anchor a conclusion on the basis of said parts. In ascertaining the
facts established by witnesses, everything stated by them on direct, cross, and redirect Gallery Frames appealed all the way to the Supreme Court (SC). The Supreme Court
examinations must be calibrated and considered. It must be stressed in this regard that affirmed the decision of the Labor Arbiter and the decision became final on May 27,
facts imperfectly or erroneously stated in an answer to one question may be supplied or 2002.
explained as qualified by the answer to other question. The principle falsus in uno, falsus
in omnibus is not strictly applied to this jurisdiction.
After the finality of the SC decision, Nacar filed a motion before the LA for Except: When later on established with certainty. Interest shall still be 6% per annum
recomputation as he alleged that his backwages should be computed from the time of demandable from the date of judgment because such on such date, it is already
his illegal dismissal (January 24, 1997) until the finality of the SC decision (May 27, 2002) deemed that the amount of damages is already ascertained.
with interest. The LA denied the motion as he ruled that the reckoning point of the
computation should only be from the time Nacar was illegally dismissed (January 24, 3. Compounded Interest
1997) until the decision of the LA (October 15, 1998). The LA reasoned that the said date
should be the reckoning point because Nacar did not appeal hence as to him, that
– This is applicable to both monetary and non-monetary obligations
decision became final and executory.

– 6% per annum computed against award of damages (interest) granted by the court.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Labor Arbiter is correct.
To be computed from the date when the court’s decision becomes final and executory
until the award is fully satisfied by the losing party.
HELD: No. There are two parts of a decision when it comes to illegal dismissal cases
(referring to cases where the dismissed employee wins, or loses but wins on appeal). The
4. The 6% per annum rate of legal interest shall be applied prospectively:
first part is the ruling that the employee was illegally dismissed. This is immediately final
even if the employer appeals – but will be reversed if employer wins on appeal. The
second part is the ruling on the award of backwages and/or separation pay. For – Final and executory judgments awarding damages prior to July 1, 2013 shall apply the
backwages, it will be computed from the date of illegal dismissal until the date of the 12% rate;
decision of the Labor Arbiter. But if the employer appeals, then the end date shall be
extended until the day when the appellate court’s decision shall become final. Hence, – Final and executory judgments awarding damages on or after July 1, 2013 shall apply
as a consequence, the liability of the employer, if he loses on appeal, will increase – this the 12% rate for unpaid obligations until June 30, 2013; unpaid obligations with respect
is just but a risk that the employer cannot avoid when it continued to seek recourses to said judgments on or after July 1, 2013 shall still incur the 6% rate.
against the Labor Arbiter’s decision. This is also in accordance with Article 279 of the
Labor Code. Felix Abe, et al vs Foster Wheeler Corp. & Caltex Inc.
GR NO. L-14785 & L-14923
Anent the issue of award of interest in the form of actual or compensatory damages, Barrera, J.p.
the Supreme Court ruled that the old case of Eastern Shipping Lines vs CA is already
modified by the promulgation of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetary Board Nature of the Case
Resolution No. 796 which lowered the legal rate of interest from 12% to 6%. Specifically, An appeal before the SC against the CA’s decision affirming the conviction of the
the rules on interest are now as follows: accused by the RTC of Bacolod.

1. Monetary Obligations ex. Loans: FACTS

a. If stipulated in writing: This is a consolidated criminal case nos. (1)95-17070- Murder; (2)95-17071- Homicide
against the accused-appellant, who killed Edmund Prayco and Leopoldo Guiro
respectively on March 16, 1995 in the Municipality of Murcia, Negros Occidental. The
a.1. shall run from date of judicial demand (filing of the case) accused appellant has said to have used a firearm, with treachery, with intent to kill
and taking advantage of nighttime, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and
a.2. rate of interest shall be that amount stipulated feloniously attack, assault and shoot the victims.

b. If not stipulated in writing On July 2, 2003, the RTC of Bacolod City convicted the accused-appellant, Jose Pepito
Combate in crime of Homicide with the penalty of RECLUSION TEMPORAL in its medium
b.1. shall run from date of default (either failure to pay upon extra-judicial demand or period and payment of indemnity, compensatory damages, reimbursement of burial
upon judicial demand whichever is appropriate and subject to the provisions of Article expenses to the heirs of Guiro & moral damages; and in the crime of Murder with the
1169 of the Civil Code) penalty of Reclusion perpetua and payment of indemnity and compensatory damages
to the heirs of Prayco.
b.2. rate of interest shall be 6% per annum
On January 30, 2008, the CA affirmed the assailed judgment of the lower court and
modified the award of damages which deleted the compensatory damages in both
2. Non-Monetary Obligations (such as the case at bar) cases thus, awarding exemplary damages of P25, 000.00 to heirs of Leopoldo Guiro and
awarding the same to heirs of Edmund Prayco.
a. If already liquidated, rate of interest shall be 6% per annum, demandable from date
of judicial or extra-judicial demand (Art. 1169, Civil Code) The judgment of the RTC- Bacolod which was affirmed by the CA was then questioned
by accused-appelant, Jose Combate that the trial court erred in convicting him of the
b. If unliquidated, no interest crimes of homicide and murder, despite the fact that his guilt was not proved beyond
reasonable doubt because of the inconsistencies of the testimonies of the witness of the done. Thus, the presumption that their testimonies were not moved by any ill will and
prosecution and those inconsistencies will erode the credibility of the witness. The bias stands, and, therefore, their testimonies are entitled to full faith and credit.
accused-appellant said that there was a failure of the lower court to.
The court then stated WHAT MAY BE RECOVERED WHEN DEATH OCCURS.
ISSUE/s When death occurs due to a crime, the following may be recovered: (1) civil
indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim; (2) actual or compensatory damages;
Whether or not the RTC of Bacolod erred in convicting the accused of the crime (3) moral damages; (4) exemplary damages; (5) attorney’s fees and expenses of
homicide & Murder despite the fact that his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable litigation; and (6) interest, in proper cases.[10][59] InPeople v. Tubongbanua,[11][60] interest
doubt. at the rate of six percent (6%) was ordered to be applied on the award of damages.
This rule would be subsequently applied by the Court in several cases such
RULING asMendoza v. People,[12][61] People v. Buban,[13][62] People v. Guevarra,[14][63] and People
v. Regalario.[15][64] Thus, we likewise adopt this rule in the instant case. Interest of six
NO. The following doctrines were then referred to by the court in its decision. percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the award of civil indemnity and all
damages, i.e., actual or compensatory damages, moral damages and exemplary
The Factual findings of the court should be respected. damages, from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.
Time-tested is the doctrine that the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of a witness
is entitled to great weight, sometimes even with finality. The Supreme Court will not
interfere with that assessment, absent any indication that the lower court has
overlooked some material facts or gravely abused its discretion.

Minor and insignificant inconsistencies bolster credibility


Complementing the above doctrine is the equally established rule that minor and
insignificant inconsistencies in the testimony tend to bolster, rather than weaken, the
credibility of witnesses, for they show that the testimony is not contrived or rehearsed. As
the Court put it in People v. Cristobal, “Trivial inconsistencies do not rock the pedestal
upon which the credibility of the witness rests, but enhances credibility as they manifest
spontaneity and lack of scheming.”

Testimony of a witness must be considered with entirety.


The testimony of a witness must be considered in its entirety and not merely on its
truncated parts. The technique in deciphering a testimony is not to consider only its
isolated parts and anchor a conclusion on the basis of said parts. In ascertaining the
facts established by witnesses, everything stated by them on direct, cross, and redirect
examinations must be calibrated and considered. It must be stressed in this regard that
facts imperfectly or erroneously stated in an answer to one question may be supplied or
explained as qualified by the answer to other question. The principle falsus in uno, falsus
in omnibus is not strictly applied to this jurisdiction.
In People v. Osias:
“It is perfectly reasonable to believe the testimony of a witness with respect to some
facts and disbelieve it with respect to other facts. And it has been aptly said that even
when witnesses are found to have deliberately falsified in some material particulars, it is
not required that the whole of their uncorroborated testimony be rejected but such
portions thereof deemed worthy of belief may be credited.”

The primordial consideration is that the witness was present at the scene of the crime
and that he positively identified [the accused] as one of the perpetrators of the crime
charged.

POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION PREVAILS OVER DEFENSE OF DENIAL


Categorical and consistent positive identification, absent any showing of ill motive on
the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over the defense of denial.
Accused-appellant was positively and categorically identified by the witnesses. They
have no reason to perjure and accused-appellant was unable to prove that the
prosecution witnesses were moved by any consideration other than to see that justice is