Albert Tison and Claudio Jabon vs Sps Pomasin, et. al.

(No causal connection between lack of driver’s license to a vehicular accident caused by
another’s negligent driving.)

A tractor-trailer and a jeepney (jitney, lol) collided in Maharlika Highway I Alabay. Laarni was
driving the jeep towards the direction of Legaspi City while Jabon’s tractor-trailer was driving
on the opposite direction towards Naga City. Multiple deaths and injury resulted.
Respondents, who rode the jeep, alleged that the proximate cause of the accident was the
negligence, imprudence and carelessness of the petitioners. Petitioners contend that it was
the Pomasins’ driver Laarni’s negligence which was the proximate cause. RTC considered that
Laarni (jeep) caused the accident. CA reversed, it was Jabon’s (tractor-trailer) fault because
he was speeding, and Tison, the employer, was also at fault.

Issue: Who is at fault?

Held: The jeep was negligent, despite the tractor driver not having a license to drive, because
there is no causal connection between the injury received and the violation of the traffic
regulation. It must be proven that the violation of the traffic regulation was the proximate
cause of the injury or that it substantially contributed thereto. In the case at bar, there is no
causal connection between the tractor trailer driver’s restriction on his license to the vehicular
collision. The fact that the jitney easily fell into the road shoulder, an undebated fact, supports
the trial court’s conclusion that the jitney was indeed going downhill which, it may be
repeated, was the original testimony of Gregorio that the road was “curving and
downward.”[25] It is this conclusion, prodded by the inconsistency of Gregorio’s testimony,
that gives credence to the further testimony of Jabon that the herein respondent’s jitney,
“loaded with passengers with top-load” “was running in a zigzag manner.”[26] Going
downward, the jitney had the tendency to accelerate. The fall into the shoulder of the road
can result in the loss of control of the jitney, which explains why it was running in a zigzag
manner before it hit the tractor-trailer. There was no showing that the tractor-trailer was
speeding. There is a preponderance of evidence that the tractor-trailer was in fact ascending.
Considering its size and the weight of the tractor-trailer, its speed could not be more than that
of a fully loaded jitney which was running downhill in a zigzagging manner. Neither can it be
inferred that Jabon was negligent. In hindsight, it can be argued that Jabon should have
swerved to the right upon seeing the jitney zigzagging before it collided with the tractor-trailer.
Accidents, though, happen in an instant, and, understandably in this case, leaving the driver
without sufficient time and space to maneuver a vehicle the size of a tractor-trailer uphill and
away from collision with the jitney oncoming downhill.
Ocean Builders Construction v. Cubacub
Ocean Builders Construction v. Cubacub (2011) / Carpio-Morales

Facts
B. Cubacub was employed as OBC's maintenance man. B had chicken pox and was adviced by GM
Hao to rest for 3 days at the OBC's barracks. 3 days later, he did his usual chores, and asked Silangga
to accompany him to his house so he can rest. Hao gave B 1k and ordered Silangga to bring B to the
hospital. Silangga + 2 others brought B to the Caybiga Hospital. B was confined, and the following day,
the hospital called for B's parents (+ Dr. Frias) and transferred B to the QCGH where he was placed in
the ICU and died the ff day. QCGH's death cert: immediate cause of death is cardio-respiratory arrest;
antecedent cause is pneumonia. Dr. Frias' causes: cardiac arrest, multiple organ system failure,
septicemia, chicken pox.
The Cubacubs filed a complaint for damages against OBC, alleging that GM Hao was guilty of
negligence, leading to B's death. RTC dismissed the complaint, saying that Hao was not under any
obligation to bring B to better hospitals. The CA reversed this, saying that Hao violated LC 161. OBC's
MfR was denied.
Issue and Holding
WON Hao was negligent. NO
1. The present case is one for damages based on torts (employer-employee reln
incidental)
1. Three elements
1. Duty
2. Breach
3. Injury and proximate causation
2. Provision concerned: LC 161: duty of petitioner to provide adequate medical
assistance to employees in case of emergency
1. no allegation that company is hazardous; no allegation on the # of
employees in OBC - if more than 50, it needs to have a nurse, et al. (accdg to
Hao, 7 regular + 20 contractual employees only)
2. accdg to RTC, what Hao did / advised constituted adequate and
immediate medical assistance; Hao does not appear to have a medical
background so he may not be expected to have known that B needs to be in a
better hospital
3. Hao's alleged negligence cannot be considered as the proximate
cause
1. PROXIMATE CAUSE - that which, in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by an efficient intervening cause, produces injury
& w/o w/c, the result would not have occurred; direct result or a
reasonably probable consequence of the act or omission
4. Not in the records: B contracting chicken pox from a co-worker; Hao
negligent in not bringing said co-worker to a doctor / isolation area
Fernando vs CA

Facts:

From the evidence presented we see the following facts: On November 7, 1975, Bibiano Morta, market master of
the Agdao Public Market filed a requisition request with the Chief of Property of the City Treasurer's Office for the
re-emptying of the septic tank in

Agdao. An invitation to bid was issued to Aurelio Bertulano, Lito Catarsa, Feliciano Bascon, Federico Bolo and
Antonio Suñer, Jr. Bascon won the bid. On November 26, 1975 Bascon was notified and he signed the purchase
order. However, before such date, specifically on

November 22, 1975, bidder Bertulano with four other companions namely Joselito Garcia, William Liagoso,
Alberto Fernando and Jose Fajardo, Jr. were found dead inside the septic tank. The bodies were removed by a
fireman. One body, that of Joselito Garcia,... was taken out by his uncle, Danilo Garcia and taken to the Regional
Hospital but he expired there. The City Engineer's office investigated the case and learned that the five victims
entered the septic tank without clearance from it nor with the knowledge and consent... of the market master. In
fact, the septic tank was found to be almost empty and the victims were presumed to be the ones who did the re-
emptying. Dr. Juan Abear of the City Health Office autopsied the bodies and in his reports, put the cause of death
of all five... victims as 'asphyxia' caused by the diminution of oxygen supply in the body working below normal
conditions. The lungs of the five victims burst, swelled in hemmorrhagic areas and this was due to their intake of
toxic gas, which, in this case, was sulfide gas produced from the... waste matter inside the septic tank

Issues:

1. Is the respondent Davao City guilty of negligence in the case at bar?

2. If so, is such negligence the immediate and proximate cause of deaths of the victims hereof?

Ruling:

Petitioners fault the city government of Davao for failing to clean a septic tank for the period of 19 years resulting
in an accumulation of hydrogen sulfide gas which killed the laborers. They contend that such failure was
compounded by the fact that there was no warning... sign of the existing danger and no efforts exerted by the
public respondent to neutralize or render harmless the effects of the toxic gas. They submit that the public
respondent's gross negligence was the proximate cause of the fatal incident.

We do not subscribe to this view. While it may be true that the public respondent has been remiss in its duty to
re-empty the septic tank annually, such negligence was not a continuing one

Upon learning from the report of the market master about the need to... clean the septic tank of the public toilet in
Agdao Public Market, the public respondent immediately responded by issuing invitations to bid for such service.

Thereafter, it awarded the bid to the lowest bidder, Mr. Feliciano Bascon

The public... respondent, therefore, lost no time in taking up remedial measures to meet the situation.

It is likewise an undisputed fact that despite the public respondent's failure to re-empty the septic tank since
1956, people in the market have been using the public toilet for their... personal necessities but have remained
unscathed.

Principles:

The accident in the case at bar occurred because the victims on their own and without authority... from the public
respondent opened the septic tank.