Related

 Provisions:  
BATACLAN  vs  MEDINA    
Criminal  Liability  –  How  incurred  –  Wrongful  act  done  be  different  from  what  was  intended   ART.  1733.  Common  carriers,  
Date:  October  22,  1957   from  the  nature  of  their  business  
Ponente:  Montemayor,  J.     and  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  
are  bound  to  observe  
 
extraordinary  diligence  in  the  
SUMMARY:   was   being   driven   by   its   regular   chauffeur,   vigilance  over  the  goods  and  for  
the  safety  of  the  passengers  
Salud   Villanueva,   in   her   name   and   in   behalf   of   her   5   Conrado  Saylon.    
transported  by  them,  according  to  
children  who  are  minors,  claim  damages  and  attorney’s   3. 2:00   AM   –   running   within   the   jurisdiction   of  
all  the  circumstances  of  each  case.  
fees  in  this  suit  against  defendant  Medina,  operator  and   Imus,  Cavite  the  front  tire  of  the  bus  burst  and   Such  extraordinary  diligence  in  the  
owner   of   Medina   Transportation.   On   September   13,   the   vehicle   zig-­‐zagged,   fell   into   a   canal,   and   vigilance  over  the  goods  is  further  
1952,  a  bus  on  which  her  husband  was  a  passenger  fell   turned  turtle.     expressed  in  articles  1734,  1735,  
into  a  canal  or  ditch,  causing  her  husband  to  be  trapped   4. Some   of   the   passengers   managed   to   leave   the   and  1745,  Nos.  5,  6,  and  7,  while  
inside.   Gas   apparently   leaked   from   the   bus.   When   men   bus,   others   had   to   be   helped   or   pulled   out   the  extra  ordinary  diligence  for  
from   a   nearby   rural   area   came   to   help,   with   their   source   except   for   four   passengers,   among   which   was   the  safety  of  the  passengers  is  
of   lighting   being   torches   lit   and   fueled   with   petroleum,   a   Juan   Bataclán,   who   were   stuck   inside   the   further  set  forth  in  articles  1755  
fierce  fire  immediately  started.  The  driver  and  conductor,   vehicle.     and  1756.  
 
through   testimonies   of   witnesses,   were   found   to   be   5. Shouts  for  help  were  made  to  the  houses  in  the  
ART.  1759.  Common  carriers  are  
negligent  in  failing  to  warn  the  men  that  they  should  not   neighborhood.    
liable  for  the  death  of  or  injuries  
go   near   the   bus   as   gas   had   leaked   and   this   proximity   6. After  half  an  hour,  came  about  ten  men,  one  of   to  passengers  through  the  
could   cause   a   fire.   Petition   was   granted   and   damages   them  carrying  a  lighted  torch  made  of  bamboo   negligence  or  willful  acts  of  the  
were  awarded  to  the  widow  and  her  children.     with   a   wick   on   one   end,   evidently   fueled   with   former's  employees,  although  
  petroleum.     such  employees  may  have  acted  
ISSUES:   7. A   fierce   fire   started.   Apparently,   a   significant   beyond  the  scope  of  their  
1. WON   the   defendant   carrier,   Medina   amount   of   gasoline   began   to   leak   and   escape   authority  or  in  violation  of  the  
Transportation,   is   liable   for   the   death   of   Juan   from  the  gas  tank  on  the  side  of  the  chassis.     order  of  the  common  carriers.  
Bataclán  by  virtue  of  the  negligence  on  the  part   8. The  charred  bodies  of  the  four  passengers  were   This  liability  of  the  common  
carriers  does  not  cease  upon  
of   the   carrier’s   agents   (driver   and   conductor)   recovered  and  identified  that  same  day.    
proof  that  they  exercised  all  the  
according   to   Articles   1733,   1759,   and   1763   of   Juan   Bataclán’s   widow,   Salud   Villanueva,   in   her  
diligence  of  a  good  father  of  a  
the  Civil  Code     name   and   in   behalf   of   her   five   minor   children,   family  in  the  selection  and  
2. WON   the   proximate   cause   of   death   was   the   brought   the   present   suit   to   recover   from   supervision  of  their  employees.  
fierce  fire  that  burned  the  bus     defendant  damages  and  attorney’s  fees.    
     
FACTS:    
1. Shortly   after   12AM   -­‐   September   13,   1952   Bus   HOLDING:  
No.   30   of   the   Medina   Transportation,   left   1. Yes.   The   responsibilities   of   common   carrier   to  
Amadeo,  Cavite  for  Pasay  City.     its   passengers   and   their   goods   according   to  
2. Medina   Transportation   is   operated   by   its   Articles  1733,  1759,  and  1763  of  the  Civil  Code  
owner,  defendant  Mariano  Medina.  Bus  No.  30   were   not   fulfilled,   constituting   a   breach   of  
BATAC | CHU
 contract  of  transportation  for  hire  for  failure  of  
Related  Provisions:  
Medina   Transportation   to   take   Bataclán   to   his  
 
destination  safely.     ART.  1763.  A  common  carrier  
2. The   proximate   cause   of   death   was   actually   the   responsible  for  injuries  suffered  by  a  
overturning   of   the   bus.   The   men   carrying   the   passenger  on  account  of  the  willful  acts  
torches   which   started   the   fierce   fire   that   burned   or  negligence  of  other  passengers  or  of  
the   bus   came   to   help   in   the   first   place   because   strangers,  if  the  common  carrier's  
the   overturning   of   the   bus   caused   four   employees  through  the  exercise  of  the  
passengers  to  be  trapped  inside.     diligence  of  a  good  father  of  a  family  
  could  have  prevented  or  stopped  the  
act  or  omission.  
The   men   who   came   to   help   came   from   a   rural  
 
area,   where   flashlights   or   other   sources   of   light  
Volume  38,  pages  695-­‐696  of  American  
besides   a   torch   were   not   accessible.   A   light   jurisprudence:  (proximate  cause  of  
source   was   necessary   in   order   for   the   men   to   death)  
extend  aid  to  the  trapped  passengers  given  that   .  .  .  'that  cause,  which,  in  natural  and  
the  accident  occurred  at  2AM.     continuous  sequence,  unbroken  by  any  
  efficient  intervening  cause,  produces  
The   conductor   and   the   driver   should   have   had   the  injury,  and  without  which  the  result  
the   foresight   to   know   that   in   the   position   that   would  not  have  occurred.'  And  more  
the   overturned   bus   was   in,   gas   could   and   must   comprehensively,  'the  proximate  legal  
cause  is  that  acting  first  and  producing  
have   leaked   from   the   tank,   aside   from   the   fact  
the  injury,  either  immediately  or  by  
that  gas  can  be  smelt  and  detected  even  from  a  
setting  other  events  in  motion,  all  
distance  when  spilled  over  a  large  area.       constituting  a  natural  and  continuous  
  chain  of  events,  each  having  a  close  
RULING:   causal  connection  with  its  immediate  
In   view   of   the   foregoing,   with   the   modification   that   the   predecessor,  the  final  event  in  the  
damages   awarded   by   the   trial   court   are   increased   from   chain  immediately  effecting  the  injury  
ONE   THOUSAND   (P1,000)   PESOS   TO   SIX   THOUSAND   as  a  natural  and  probable  result  of  the  
(P6,000)  PESOS,  and  from  SIX  HUNDRED  PESOS  TO  EIGHT   cause  which  first  acted,  under  such  
HUNDRED   (P800)   PESOS,   for   the   death   of   Bataclan   and   circumstances  that  the  person  
responsible  for  the  first  event  should,  
for   the   attorney's   fees,   respectively,   the   decision  
as  an  ordinary  prudent  and  intelligent  
appealed  is  from  hereby  affirmed,  with  costs.  
person,  have  reasonable  ground  to  
  expect  at  the  moment  of  his  act  or  
  default  that  an  injury  to  some  person  
Paras,   C.   J.,   Bengzon,   Padilla,   Reyes,   A.,   Bautista   might  probably  result  therefrom.  
Angelo,  Labrador,  Concepcion,  Reyes,  J.  B.  L.,  Endencia,  
and  Felix,  JJ.,  concur.    
 

BATAC | CHU