Baritua v. CA (Mar.

22, 1990)
Abraham F. Sarmiento, J.:
Domingo Lucenario for petitioners.
Ernesto A. Atienza for private respondents.
CAPTION/PROBLEM: Tricycle collided with bus, tricycle driver died. Bus operator settled with tricycle drivers
estranged wife. A year later, tricycle drivers parents sued bus operator for damages alleging that the latter promised
to indemnify them for the death of the son, his funeral expenses and the damaged tricycle (which was allegedly
bought with the parents money). Who is entitled to the indemnity the estranged wife or the parents?
HELD: Tricycle drivers parents cannot claim because they are not his compulsory heirs. His wife and child are the
compulsory heirs. Spouse concurs with all classes of heirs but parents are compulsory heirs only when decedent dies
without a legitimate descendant.
FACTS

Nov. 7, 1979 - BIENVENIDO Nacarios tricycle collided with JB Bus No. 80 operated by Jose BARITUA and
driven by Edgar BITANCOR, along the National Highway, San Cayetano, Baao, CamSur.

Bienvenido and his passenger died because of the accident.

Bienvenido was survived by his estranged wife ALICIA Baracena (with whom he had a child), and his
PARENTS, NICOLAS and VICTORIA Nacario.

Mar. 27, 1980 The bus companys insurer paid P18,500 to Alicia by virtue of an extra-judicial settlement
wherein Alicia agreed to not to prosecute Baritua and Bitancor for her husbands death.
o She executed a Release of Claim in favor of Baritua, Bitancor, and the insurer releasing them
from all claims and damages resulting from the accident which killed Bienvenido.

Sep. 2, 1981 Nicolas and Victoria filed a suit for damages before the CamSur CFI against Baritua and
Bitancor.
o Parents alleged that Baritua went to Bienvenidos wake and promised them indemnity for
Bienvenidos death, the funeral expenses, and the damaged tricycle (which was bought from
money loaned by the parents to their son).

CFI dismissed the complaint, holding that the payment to Alicia (and the child) extinguished any claim
against Baritua et.al. for the death of Bienvenido since Alicia and her child are the preferred heirs and
successors-in-interest of Bienvenido.

CA reversed the CFI, holding that:

o The parents brought the case in their personal capacity and not as heirs.
o Alicia could not have validly waived the claim of the parents since she was not the one who
suffered such damages.
o The parents were able to establish that they bought the tricycle and Baritua et.al. failed to prove
otherwise, hence they must pay for the damage to the tricycle.
o AWARD: P10,000.00 for the damage of the tricycle, P5,000.00 for complete funeral services,
P450.00 for cemetery lot, P55.00 for oracion adulto, and P5,000.00 for attorneys fees.

Baritua and Bitancor appealed to the SC.

ISSUE (HELD)
W/N Baritua et.al. are still liable to pay damages to the parents despite the extra-judicial settlement with the wife (NO)
RATIO

NCC 1231(1): Obligations are extinguished by payment or performance.

NCC 1240: Payment shall be made to the person in whose favor the obligation has been constituted, or his
successor in interest, or any person authorized to receive it.

It has been established that Baritua et.al. have paid the claim to Alicia. The question now: Is Alicia entitled to
such payment?

According to NCC 887, No. 2, legitimate parents and ascendants become compulsory heirs in default of
legitimate children and descendants. NCC 985 provides: In default of legitimate children and descendants
of the deceased, his parents and ascendants shall inherit from him, to the exclusion of collateral relatives.

On the other hand, NCC 887 also provides that the surviving spouse is also a compulsory heir; and s/he is
not excluded by the legitimate children/descendants or by the legitimate parents/ascendants.

SC: It is patently clear that the parents of the deceased succeed only when the latter dies without a
legitimate descendant. On the other hand, the surviving spouse concurs with all classes of heirs.

Therefore Bienvenidos compulsory heirs and successors-in-interest are Alicia and the child. Nicolas and
Victoria are not compulsory heirs. Baritua et.al. were therefore correct in settling the claim with Alicia, as she
is the widow and the guardian of Bienvenidos child.
Nicolas and Victoria can no longer recover the purchase price of the tricycle and the funeral expenses from
Baritua et.al. since their obligation has been extinguished with the payment to Alicia. Their proper recourse
is against the estate of Bienvenido, since he is the alleged debtor.

DISPOSITION: Petition granted. CA decision set aside, CFI decision reinstated.