Sept.

22, 2011

IX: DAMAGES
A. DEFINITION AND CONCEPT B. KINDS OF DAMAGES 1. ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY
Sept. 29, 2011

FULE V CA (CRUZ, BELARMINO) 286 SCRA 698 ROMERO; March 23, 1998 NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari FACTS - Fule, a corporate secretary of the Rural Bank of Alaminos (the Bank) by profession and jeweler on the side, acquired a 10-hectare property in Rizal. The former owner, Jacobe, had mortgaged it to the Bank for a loan of 10k but it was later foreclosed and offered for public auction upon his default. - Petitioner asked Dichoso and Mendoza (the Agents) to look for an interested buyer, and found one in private respondent Dr. Cruz. At the time, petitioner had shown interest in buying a pair of emerald-cut diamond earrings from Dr. Cruz but never came to an agreed price. Subsequently, negotiations for the barter of the jewelry and the property ensued; upon the request of Dr. Cruz, it was found by Atty. Belarmino that no barter was feasible because the 1-year period of redemption had not expired. To get over this legal impediment, petitioner executed a deed of redemption on behalf of Jacobe. - Petitioner arrived at Belarminos residence with the agents to execute a deed of absolute sale while Cruz held on to the earrings. Petitioner issued a certification stating the actual consideration of the sale was Php200k and not Php80k as indicated in the deed. Since the earrings were appraised at only Php160k, the remaining 40k was to be paid later in cash. This was done apparently to minimize the capital gains tax that petitioner would have to shoulder. Petitioner headed for the bank to meet up with Cruz and pick up the earrings. When asked if the jewelry was ok, petitioner nodded to express his satisfaction. Petitioner paid the agents $300 and some pieces of jewelry, but not half of the pair of earrings in question as previously promised. - Later that evening, petitioner arrived at Belarminos residence complaining the earrings were fake as confirmed by a tester. Petitioner accused the agents of deceiving him, which they denied. He nonetheless took back the $300 and jewelry given them. After another failed testing, the petitioner reported the matter to the police where the agents also executed their sworn statements. - Petitioner filed a complaint with the RTC to declare the contract of sale over the property null and void on the ground of fraud and deceit. The lower court denied the prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction over the deed as they found that the genuine pair of earrings had been delivered by Cruz. The 2 hours before petitioners complaint was considered unreasonable delay, placing petitioner in estoppel. The Court furthered that all elements of a valid contract were present, namely a meeting of the minds, determinate subject matter, and price certain. As the earrings had been delivered and the contract of absolute sale executed, the contract of barter or sale had been consummated. - The Court also finds that the plaintiff acted in bad, awarding Cruz P300k as moral damages and P100k as exemplary damages; Atty. Belarmino P250k as moral damages and P150k as exemplary damages; and granting both P25k each as attorneys fees and litigation expenses. A petition with the CA yielded the same result, hence this petition. ISSUE WON the TC erred in awarding damages HELD NO - In the instant case, the TC awarded damages analogous to malicious prosecution under Article 2219(8) of the NCC for the following reasons: - The malice with which petitioner filed the case is apparent. As an experienced jeweler who thoroughly examined the earrings himself and went so far as to sketch them earlier, it is illogical that he would fail to exert extra effort to check its genuineness

2. MORAL a. CONCEPT b. PROOF AND PROXIMATE CAUSE c. CASES WHERE ALLOWED i. UNFOUNDED SUITS ii. LABOR CASES iii. TAKING OF LIFE
Oct. 06, 2011

d. FACTORS IN DETERMINING AMOUNT

PNB V CA (FLORES) 266 SCRA 136 KAPUNAN; 1997 Jan 6 FACTS - Flores is a prominent businessman, licensed and engaged in the real estate business, buying and selling houses and lots. Flores filed a complaint against PNB when the appellant bank refused to honor his Manager's Checks worth P1 Million because of the alleged shortage in appellee's payment to the effect that he had to go back and forth the bank to encash said checks and that he lost a deal of a house for sale in Baguio City worth P1 Million as he could not produce said amount withheld by the appellant bank. Appellee Flores further testified as to the effect of the incident on his integrity as a businessman. - Flores won in the suit and the LC awarded him P1M moral damages andt P100,000.00 exemplary damages, but was later reduced by the CA to P100,000.00 and P25,000.00 respectively. - PNB appealed from the decision, believing that no or lower amount of damages should be awarded to Flores. As a defense, PNB even attacked Flores character by alluding to his alleged reputation as a gambler and big time casino player. PNB asserted that Flores used the proceeds of the managers check on the gaming table and not for purchase of a house. ISSUE WON the moral and exemplary damages should be reduced HELD NO - The SC even increased the moral and exemplary damages awarded by CA by 50% (P200,000.00 and P50,000.00 respectively). Ratio There is no hard and fast rule in the determination of what would be a fair amount of moral damages, since each case must be governed by its own peculiar circumstances. - Article 2217 of the Civil Code recognizes that moral damages which include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injury, are incapable of pecuniary estimation. - As to exemplary damages, Article 2229 of the Civil Code provides that such damages may be imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. While exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right, they need not be proved, although plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded.

Page

at the precise moment of the exchange. His acts thus failed to accord with what an ordinary prudent man would have done in the same situation. - As an experienced businessman and banker, he was shrewd enough to bloat the propertys price from 25k to 75k only a few days after he had purchased it for a far lower cost, the value of which still fell short of the diamond earrings price. - Also, it took him 2 hours of unexplained delay before complaining the earrings were counterfeita period in which anything could have happened while petitioner was in possession of the jewelry. - Given this, it would appear that the cause of action in the instant case was contrived by the petitioner himself in hopes of obtaining a favorable outcome in his complaint to take the real jewelry, return a fake, and get back the property. This is plain and simple, unjust enrichment. All that considered, the damages prayed for were reasonably proportionate to the sufferings they underwent. - Petitioner filed a malicious and unfounded case all the while dragging down private respondents, whose reputations had been soiled by petitioners coming to court with unclean hands. Because of the falsity, malice and baseless nature of the complaint, defendants were compelled to litigate and are thus also entitled to the awarding of attorneys fees under Article 2208. Disposition decision of the CA is AFFIRMED. Dr. Cruz, however, is ordered to pay petitioner the balance of the purchase price of Php40k PHILIPPINE AIRLINES INC V CA (PANTEJO) 275 SCRA 621 REGALADO; July 17, 1997 NATURE: Appeal by certiorari FACTS - On October 23, 1988, private respondent Pantejo, then City Fiscal of Surigao City, boarded a PAL plane in Manila and disembarked in Cebu City where he was supposed to take his connecting flight to Surigao City. However, due to typhoon Osang, the connecting flight to Surigao City was cancelled. - To accommodate the needs of its stranded passengers, PAL initially gave out cash assistance of P100.00 and, the next day, P200.00, for their expected stay of two days in Cebu. Pantejo requested instead that he be billeted in a hotel at PAL's expense because he did not have cash with him at that time, but PAL refused. Thus, respondent Pantejo was forced to seek and accept the generosity of a co-passenger, an Engr. Andoni Dumlao, and he shared a room with the latter at Sky View Hotel with the promise to pay his share of the expenses upon reaching Surigao. - When the flight for Surigao was resumed, Pantejo came to know that the hotel expenses of his co-passengers were reimbursed by PAL. At this point, Pantejo informed Oscar Jereza, PAL's Manager for Departure Services at Mactan Airport and who was in charge of cancelled flights, that he was going to sue the airline for discriminating against him. It was only then that Jereza offered to pay respondent Pantejo P300 which, due to the ordeal and anguish he had undergone, the latter decline. Thereafter, PAntejo filed an action for damages against PAL. - The RTC of Surigao City, rendered judgment against PAL, ordering the latter to pay Pantejo P300 for actual damages, P150,000 as moral damages, P100,000 as exemplary damages, P15,000.00 as attorney's fees, and 6% interest from the time of the filing of the complaint until said amounts shall have been fully paid, plus costs of suit. - On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision of the court a quo, but with the exclusion of the award of attorney's fees and litigation expenses.

Page

ISSUE WON the lower courts erred in awarding damages in favor of plaintiff HELD NO - It must be emphasized that a contract to transport passengers is quite different in kind and degree from any other contractual relation, and this is because of the relation which an air carrier sustain with the public. Its business is mainly with the travelling public. It invites people to avail of the comforts and advantages it offers. The contract of air carriage, therefore, generates a relation attended with a public duty. Neglect or malfeasance of the carrier's employees naturally could give ground for an action for damages. - In ruling for Pantejo, both the RTC and the CA found that PAL acted in bad faith in refusing to provide hotel accommodations for Pantejo or to reimburse him for hotel expenses incurred despite and in contrast to the fact that other passengers were so favored. Factors considered in computing damages > PAL acted in bad faith in disregarding its duties as a common carrier to its passengers and in discriminating against Pantejo. It was even oblivious to the fact that PAntejo was exposed to humiliation and embarrassment especially because of his government position and social prominence, which altogether necessarily subjected him to ridicule, shame and anguish. It remains uncontroverted that at the time of the incident, herein respondent was then the City Prosecutor of Surigao City, and that he is a member of the Philippine Jaycee Senate, past Lt. Governor of the Kiwanis Club of Surigao, a past Master of the Mount Diwata Lodge of Free Masons of the Philippines, member of the Philippine National Red Cross, Surigao Chapter, and past Chairman of the Boy Scouts of the Philippines, Surigao del Norte Chapter. - It is likewise claimed that the moral and exemplary damages awarded to respondent Pantejo are excessive and unwarranted on the ground that respondent is not totally blameless because of his refusal to accept the P100 cash assistance which was inceptively offered to him. It bears emphasis that respondent Pantejo had every right to make such refusal since it evidently could not meet his needs and that was all that PAL claimed it could offer. - His refusal to accept the P300 proffered as an afterthought when he threatened suit was justified by his resentment when he belatedly found out that his co-passengers were reimbursed for hotel expenses and he was not. Worse, he would not even have known about it were it not for a co-passenger who verbally told him that she was reimbursed by the airline for hotel and meal expenses. It may even be said that the amounts, the time and the circumstances under which those amounts were offered could not salve the moral wounds inflicted by PAL on private respondent but even approximated insult added to injury. - The discriminatory act of petitioner against respondent ineludibly makes the former liable for moral damages under Article 21 in relation to Article 2219 (10) of the Civil Code. Such inattention to and lack of care by petitioner airline for the interest of its passengers who are entitled to its utmost consideration, particularly as to their convenience, amount to bad faith which entitles the passenger to the award of moral damages. - Moral damages are emphatically not intended to enrich a plaintiff at the expense of the defendant. They are awarded only to allow the former to obtain means, diversion, or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone due to the defendant's culpable action and must, perforce, be proportional to the suffering inflicted. However, substantial damages do not translate into excessive

damages. Except for attorney's fees and costs of suit, it will be noted that the Court of Appeals affirmed point by point the factual findings of the lower court upon which the award of damages had been based. We, therefore, see no reason to modify the award of damages made by the trial court. - Under the peculiar circumstances of this case, we are convinced that the awards for actual, moral and exemplary damages granted in the judgment of respondent court, for the reasons meticulously analyzed and thoroughly explained in its decision, are just and equitable. It is high time that the travelling public is afforded protection and that the duties of common carriers, long detailed in our previous laws and jurisprudence and thereafter collated and specifically catalogued in our Civil Code in 1950, be enforced through appropriate sanctions.

VALENZUELA V CA 253 SCRA 303 KAPUNAN; February 7, 1996 (Ulit: Persons Liable, Employers) CASE FACTS Plaintiffs version: Plaintiff, Lourdes Valenzuela was driving a blue Mitsubishi Lancer with Plate Number FFU 542 at around 2:00 in the morning of June 24, 1990 along Aurora Blvd going towards Manila. Noticing something wrong her tires, she stopped at a lighted place and asked the people to verify her flat tire and to ask help if needed. She parked her car along the sidewalk turning on her emergency lights. Plaintiff was standing at the left side of the rear of her car when she was suddenly bumped by a 1987 Mitsubishi Lancer driven by defendant Richard Li. The impact caused her to be thrown against the windshield of the car of Mr. Li destroying it in the process, after which she fell on the ground. When plaintiff was pulled out, it was found that her left leg was severed up to the middle of her thigh with only some skin and muscle connected to the rest of her body. Amputation was performed on her leg. She was also confined in UERM for 20 days and eventually fitted by an artificial leg. The plaintiff sued for moral damages amounting to a million pesos and other related expenses. Defendants version: The defendant, Richard Li, denied the allegations of negligence stating that he did not see the plaintiff due to temporary blindness. According to his statement, he was traveling along Aurora Blvd. at 55kph when another car coming from the opposite direction traveling at 80kph caused his blindness by the cars full bright lights. He further stated that the plaintiffs car was not parked properly (no parking lights or early warning device) and the cars midnight blue color and the areas poor lightning disabled him from noticing the car. Also addressed in the complaint is the cars registered owner, Alexander Commercial. The defendants counterclaimed for damages, asserting that the plaintiff was reckless as she was not a registered driver. Statements of Witnesses:
PFC Felix Ramos (Police Investigator) prepared the vehicular accident report and sketch of the cars involved in the accident. Did not exactly state in his report how near the plaintiffs car was to the sidewalk. He also could not remember other details such as whether there was indeed an early warning device. Rogelio Rodriguez (witness for the plaintiff) supported the statement of Ms. Valenzuela stating that the complainant did indeed step out of her car and opened the trunk. He also saw the car of the defendant hit the plaintiff. He even further added that the defendant was under the influence of liquor. He deduced this by the smell of the defendant.

DECISION OF THE COURTS The lower trial courts ruled, The defendant Richard Li is guilty of gross negligence and liable for damages under Article 2176 of the Civil Code. The trial court likewise held Alexander Commercial, Inc., Lis employer, jointly and severally liable for damages pursuant to Article 2180. The lower court also ordered the guilty party to pay Ma. Lourdes Valenzuela several indicated sums representing damages. The defendant filed for a New Trial and Reconsideration citing evidence/testimony, which they believe the Lower Courts, might have considered in making their decision. Their motion was denied compelling them to elevate their case to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals also supported the rulings of the lower court. However, it absolved Alexander Commercial from being liable and abridged the amount of moral damages from P1,000,000 to P500,000. Both parties then filed before the Supreme Court, two separate petitions. The plaintiff questioned the decision of the Court of Appeals on absolving Alexander Commercial, Inc. from its liability and the reduction of actual and moral damages. The defendant on the other hand, stated that he should be released from liability because the accident was caused by the plaintiffs own negligence. He then added that if the court should find him guilty of negligence, such negligence should be reduced due to the negligence of Valenzuela. The Supreme Court also reinstated the decision of the Regional Trial Court. Alexander Inc. is again liable and moral damages were restored to the original P1,000,000. The high court ruled that the defendant was negligent. They described negligence as conduct of which creates an undue risk of harm to others. Richard Li was negligent as proved by evidence presented in court: he was driving at a fast speed on a slippery road under the influence of liquor. As a licensed driver, he should not be driving at a fast speed on a slippery road under the influence of liquor. By doing so, he posed undue risk of harm to the unsuspecting public. The employer, Alexander Inc., was liable under the concept of pater familias, which notes that liability ultimately falls upon the employer for his failure to exercise the diligence of a good father of the family in the selection and supervision of his employees.

SUMALPONG V CA (PEOPLE) 268 SCRA 764 FRANCISCO, February 26, 1997 NATURE: Petition for review FACTS - Sumalpong shot the victim Ramos after the former slapped the latters wife. Before this, Sumalpong called upon the spouses then inquired regarding the identity of those who stoned his house, then accused Ramos of stoning his house. Ramos wife, Leonarda, remarked that he should first confirm the information he received before accusing anyone, then after this Sumalpong shot Leonarda at the back of her head (though apparently, Leonarda was not harmed) then Ramos rushed towards Sumalpong who then shot Ramos twice but missed. They wrestled and in the act, Sumalpong bit on Ramos ear, causing its mutilation. - TC: Sumalpong convicted of attempted homicide. Ramos awarded with P 16,800.00 for the loss of his crops due to his failure to attend to his farmwork because of the injuries inflicted upon him by the petitioner, P2,000.00 for hospitalization expenses, and P5,000.00 by way of moral damages.

Page

- CA: affirm conviction, removed award for loss of crops and hospitalization expenses, increased moral damages to P10,000.00, and awarding nominal damages in the same amount. ISSUE WON the increase in moral damages is warranted HELD YES - Anent the increase in the amount of moral damages awarded, suffice it to state that the nature of the injuries and the degree of physical suffering endured by the complainant warrants the same. The tragic incident caused a mutilation of complainant's left ear and a permanent scar on his right forearm. These injuries have left indelible marks on the complainant's body and will serve as a constant reminder of this traumatic experience. (more discussion on the modification of amount of nominal damages and moral damages when it was not the issue appealed, rationalization for deletion of actual and compensatory damages) Disposition the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby AFFIRMED in toto.

information. In so misleading plaintiffs into purchasing first class tickets in the conviction that they had confirmed reservations, when in fact they had none, defendant wilfully and knowingly placed itself into the position of having to breach its contracts with plaintiffs should there be no last-minute cancellation by other passengers before flight time, as it turned out in this case. Bad faith means a breach of a known duty through some motive of interest or ill-will. - At any rate, granting all the mistakes advanced by the defendant, there would at least be negligence so gross and reckless as to amount to malice or bad faith. 2. YES Ratio Moral damages are recoverable in breach of contracts where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith (Art. 2220). Exemplary or corrective damages may be imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, in breach of contract where the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner (Art. 2229, 2232). A written contract for an attorney's services shall control the amount to be paid therefor unless found by the court to be unconscionable or unreasonable (Sec. 24, Rule 138, ROC). - Factors in determining Amount for Moral Damages: The amount of damages awarded in this appeal has been determined by adequately considering the official, political, social, and financial standing of the offended parties on one hand, and the business and financial position of the offender on the other. The present rate of exchange and the terms at which the amount of damages awarded would approximately be in U.S. dollars has also been considered. (a) MORAL DAMAGES - As a proximate result of defendant's breach in bad faith of its contracts with plaintiffs, the latter suffered social humiliation, wounded feelings, serious anxiety and mental anguish. It may not be humiliating to travel as tourist passengers; it is humiliating to be compelled to travel as such, contrary to what is rightfully to be expected from the contractual undertaking. - Sen Lopez was then Senate President Pro Tempore. International carriers like defendant know the prestige of such an office. For the Senate is not only the Upper Chamber of the Philippine Congress, but the nation's treaty-ratifying body. He was also former Vice-President of the Philippines. (MD = P100T) - Mrs. Maria Lopez, as wife of the Senator, shared his prestige and therefore his humiliation. In addition she suffered physical discomfort during the 13-hour trip; her reason for going to the US was actually for medical check-up and relaxation. The fact that the seating spaces in the tourist class are quite narrower than in first class will suffice to show that she indeed experienced physical suffering during the trip. (MD = P50T) - Mr. and Mrs. Alfredo Montelibano, Jr., were travelling as immediate members of the family of Sen Lopez. Even if they initially wanted to change their seat reservations from first class to tourist class, they eventually paid for first class seats. Hence, they also suffered social humiliation. (MD = P25T each) (b) EXEMPLARY DAMAGES - In view of its nature, it should be imposed in such an amount as to effectively deter similar breach of contracts in the future by defendant or other airlines. (ED = P75T) (c) ATTORNEYS FEES - Record shows a written contract of services wherein plaintiffs engaged the services of their counsel Atty. Francisco and agreed to pay the sum of P25T upon the termination of the case in the CFI, and another P25T if case is appealed to the SC. This is reasonable considering the subject matter of the present controversy, the professional standing of the attorney for plaintiffs-appellants, and the extent of the service rendered by him.

LOPEZ V PAN AM WORLD AIRWAYS 16 SCRA 431 BENGZON; March 30, 1966 FACTS - Sen Fernando Lopez, his wife, his son-in-law, and his daughter made reservations, through their agency, for first class accommodations in the Tokyo San Francisco flight of PAN-AM. PAN-AM's SF head office confirmed the reservations. First class tickets were subsequently issued, with the total fare having been fully paid before this. - As scheduled, they left Manila and as soon as they arrived in Tokyo, they contacted PAN-AM's Tokyo office regarding their accommodations. For the given reason that the first class seats were all booked up, PAN-AM's Tokyo office informed them that they could not go in that flight unless they took the tourist class. Due to pressing engagements in the US, they were constrained to take PAN-AM's flight as tourist passengers. - Sen Lopez filed suit for damages alleging breach of contracts in bad faith by defendant out of racial prejudice against Orientals. He asked for P500T actual and moral damages, P100T exemplary damages, P25T attorney's fees plus costs. - PAN-AM asserted that its failure to provide first class accommodations to plaintiffs was due to honest error of its employees. It interposed a counterclaim for atty's fees of P25T. - CFI Rizal decision: in favor of plaintiff and granted (a) P100T, moral damages; (b) P20T, exemplary damages; (c) P25T, atty's fees, and costs of the action. - Plaintiffs filed MFR asking that moral damages be increased to P400T and for 6% interest per annum on amount to be granted. - CFI modified decision: (a) P150T, moral damages; (b) P25T, exemplary damages; with legal interest on both from date of filing of complaint until paid; (c) P25T, atty's fees; and costs of the action. - Both appealed: PAN-AM contended that there was NO bad faith; Lopez et al wanted a total of P650T as award for damages. ISSUES 1. WON there was bad faith on the part of PAN-AM 2. WON the amount of damages should be increased HELD 1. YES Reasoning - Defendant through its agents first cancelled plaintiffs, reservations by mistake and thereafter deliberately and intentionally withheld from plaintiffs or their travel agent such

Page

Disposition Judgment appealed from is hereby MODIFIED so as to award in favor of plaintiffs and against defendant, the following: (1) P200T as moral damages, divided among plaintiffs; (2) P75T as exemplary or corrective damages; (3) Interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum on the moral and exemplary damages, from date of amended CFI decision, until said damages are fully paid; (4) P50T as attorney's fees; and (5) Costs of action. Counterclaim dismissed.

PRODUCERS BANK OF THE PHILS V CA (SPS CHUA) MELO; September 17, 2001 NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision and resolution of the CA FACTS - Sometime in April, 1982, respondent Salvador Chua was offered by Mr. Jimmy Rojas, manager of Producers Bank of the Philippines, to transfer his account from Pacific Banking Corporation to herein petitioner bank. - Respondent spouses opened and maintained substantial savings and current deposits with, and likewise obtained various loans from petitioner bank, one of which was a loan for P2,000,000.00 which was secured by a real estate mortgage and payable within a period of three (3) years or from 1982 to 1985. - On January 20, 1984, private respondents deposited with petitioner bank the total sum of P960,000.00, which was duly entered in private respondents' savings account passbook. - Petitioner bank failed to credit this deposit due to the fact that its Branch Manager absconded with the money of the bank's depositors. - Consequently, petitioner bank dishonored the checks drawn out by private respondents in favor of their various creditors on the ground of insufficient funds, despite the fact that at that time, the balance of private respondents' deposit was in the amount of P1,051,051.19. - Private respondents requested for copies of their ledgers covering their savings and current accounts, but petitioner bank refused. - Private respondents instituted on January 30, 1984 an action for damages against petitioner bank - On the other hand, petitioner bank filed with the City Sheriff of Bacolod a petition for extrajudicial foreclosure of the real estate - Private respondents filed a complaint for injunction and damages, alleging that the petition for extrajudicial foreclosure was without basis and was instituted maliciously in order to harass private respondents. - On April 26, 1988, the trial court rendered its decision on the latter case, in favor of the spouses Chua, awarding the sum of P2,000,000.00 as moral damages, and the sum of P250,000.00 as exemplary damages, among others. - On October 31, 1991, upon appeal by petitioner bank, the Court of Appeals modified the decisionone of the changes was the award of the sum of P500,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages. - Petitioner moved for a consideration but the same was denied, hence, this petition ISSUE WON the petitioner bank is liable for moral damages HELD: YES - Moral and exemplary damages may be awarded without proof of pecuniary loss. In awarding such damages, the court shall take into account the circumstances obtaining in the case and assess damages according to its discretion.

- As borne out by the record of this case, private respondents are engaged in several businesses, such as rice and corn trading, cement dealership, and gasoline proprietorship. The dishonor of private respondents' checks and the foreclosure initiated by petitioner adversely affected the credit standing as well as the business dealings of private respondents as their suppliers discontinued credit lines resulting in the collapse of their businesses. - In the case of Leopoldo Araneta vs. Bank of America, it was held that: "The financial credit of a businessman is a prized and valuable asset, it being a significant part of the foundation of his business. Any adverse reflection thereon constitutes some financial loss to him." - The damage to private respondents' reputation and social standing entitles them to moral damages. Article 2217, in relation to Article 2220, of the Civil Code explicitly provides that "moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury." - Obviously, petitioner bank's wrongful act caused serious anxiety, embarrassment, and humiliation to private respondents for which they are entitled to recover moral damages in the amount of P300,000.00 which we deem to be reasonable. Disposition The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed with modification only as to the award of damages

e. WHO MAY RECOVER

STREBEL V FIGUERAS 96 PHIL 321 CONCEPCION; December 29, 1954 FACTS - Strebels side: As a lessee of a lot situated in Santa Mesa, Manila, plaintiff Strebel subleased part thereof to the Standard Vacuum Oil Company; that the latter constructed thereon a Mobilgas Station which was operated by Eustaquio & Co., a partnership organized by said plaintiff and one Primo Eustaquio, that, "out of spite and with a view to the eventual acquisition of the said property for himself and his men," defendant Jose Figueras "tried all he could to built a drainage through" the aforementioned property; that, in order to accomplish this purpose, and, using his official and political influence, defendant Figueras, then Under-Secretary of Labor, caused. his co-defendant Cornelio S. Ruperto, an Assistant City Fiscal of Manila, to prepare an opinion which was signed by the City Fiscal, holding that the City of Manila has a right to construct said drainage, and, to this effect, make the necessary excavations at the boundary line of said lot leased to Strebel and the lot belonging to Figueras - Plaintiff Strebel also claims that defendant Figueras "by making use of his official and political connections," was able to induce the Secretary of Justice to transfer temporarily, from the Bureau of Immigration to the Bureau of Prisons, one Dr. Manuel Hernandez, the husband of plaintiff's step daughter; - Plaintiff asked Secretary Nepomuceno to mediate between them and Under-Secretary of Labor to forget about past family problems. - Plaintiff later on claims that Figueras still didnt forget about the past and "making use of his official and political influence," and with the cooperation of his former secretary, defendant Cornelio S. Ruperto, an Assistant City Fiscal of Manila, as well as "in connivance with the Director of Labor" which office was then held by defendant Felipe E. Jose, "and other employees in the Department and Bureau of Labor," defendant Figueras succeeded in securing the institution, against plaintiff Strebel, and his partner, Primo Eustaquio, of Criminal Case No. 11005 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, for allegedly compelling

Page

several employees to work more than eight (8) hours a day, in violation of Commonwealth Act No. 444, in relation to Commonwealth Act No. 303, although before the filing of the information "the defendants collectively and singly knew that the allegations therein are false;" that said criminal case was subsequently dismissed by the Court of First Instance of Manila for failure of the prosecution "to establish even a prima facie case against the accused"; - Through the foregoing series of acts, the defendants have "caused moral and mental suffering to the . . . plaintiff, his wife, and his entire family, and damage to his business in the amount of P15,000.00 besides actual damages in the amount of P1,500.00 paid to his attorney in defending himself from the malicious charge," ISSUE WON Plaintiff may recover damages for moral and mental suffering HELD: NO - The plan to built said drainage was seemingly abandoned before plaintiff's property rights could be violated. There was nothing wrong, either legally or morally, in the desire of Figueras to seek an outlet for the water coming from his property. On the contrary, it is required by the elementary principles of health and sanitation. Besides, there is no allegation that any lot other than that of plaintiff Strebel was better suited for the purpose. Neither could he have any arising from the assignment of his wife's son-in-law from the Bureau of Prisons - to which he had been previously assigned temporarily to the Bureau of Immigration, for 1.The authority of the Secretary of Justice to make the assignment in question and the validity thereof, under said legal provision, are submitted. Hence, it is not claimed that said officer may be held civilly liable for the aforementioned assignment. This being the case, how can such responsibility be exacted from Figueras who, it is urged, merely instigated said assignment? 2.Even if we assumed the act complained of to be wrong or to have caused injury, the right of action hypotethically resulting therefrom, if any on which we need not, and do not, express any opinion would have accrued in favor of Dr. Hernandez who is not a party in the present action not plaintiff herein. - "As a general rule, the right of recovery for mental suffering resulting from bodily injuries is restricted to the person who has suffered the bodily hurt, and there can be no recovery for distress caused by sympathy for another's suffering, or for fright due to a wrong against a third person. So the anguish of mind arising as to the safety of others who may be in personal peril from the same cause cannot be taken into consideration. - '. . . damages are not recoverable for fright or shock even when sustained as result of wilful act, unless such act was directed toward person or property or person seeking recovery; hence plaintiff is not entitled to recover against administratrix of sister's murderer for fright or shock caused by viewing mutilated body of murdered sister. The rule on this point, as stated in the American Jurisprudence, is: "Injury or Wrong to Another. In law mental anguish is restricted as a rule, to such mental pain or suffering as arises from an injury or wrong to the person himself, as distinguished from that form of mental suffering which is the accompaniment of sympathy or sorrow for another's suffering or which arises from a contemplation of wrongs committed on the person of another. Pursuant to the rule stated, a husband or wife cannot recover for mental suffering caused by his or her sympathy for the other's suffering." It should be noted that plaintiff is not even related to Dr. Hernandez. The latter's wife

is a daughter of Mrs. Strebel by a previous marriage. Hence Dr. Hernandez is merely related by affinity, not to Strebel, but to a relative by affinity of said plaintiff. - Another allegation made by plaintiffs in arguing their cause of action to recover damages, they said that "with a view to further injuring" him "and besmirching his good name in the community and waging a cleavage in the harmonious relation between Eustaquio & Co. and its laborers," defendants Felipe E. Jose and Cornelio S. Ruperto issued a press statement to the effect that plaintiff Strebel and his partner, Eustaquio had flagrantly violated the provisions of the Eight-Hour Law and that said Criminal Case had been dismissed by the court on a flimsy ground; and that this statement had "caused moral and mental suffering to the herein plaintiff and damage to his business in the amount of P5,000.00," The Supreme Court said that this news item mentions, neither the number of the case referred to, nor the names of the persons accused therein. Moreover, it merely contains a criticism of the action taken by the court. The reference, therein imputed to the Director of Labor, to the flagrant violation of the eight-hour labor law by the accused, was a mere reiteration of the theory of the Bureau of Labor, which the prosecution had adopted by filing the information in said case. Being a matter of court record, which had been taken up at the hearing held publicly, and settled in a decision already promulgated, said theory was open for public consumption, and, hence, an allusion thereto or statement thereof, in order to justify said criticism, is not actionable. - As regards the malicious prosecution point raised by Strebel, by specific mandate of Article 2219 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, however, moral damages may not be recovered in cases of crime or tort, unless either results or causes "physical injuries," which are lacking in the case at bar. Although the same article permits recovery of said damages in cases of malicious prosecution, this feature of said provision may not be availed of by the plaintiff herein, inasmuch as the acts set forth in the complaint took place in 1949, or before said Code became effective (laws shouldnt have retroactive effect).

ABS-CBN V CA (REPUBLIC BROADCASTING CORP, VIVA FILMS) DAVIDE; January 21, 1999 FACTS - ABS-CBN, by virtue of contract with VIVA, had an exclusive right to exhibit some Viva films. ABS-CBN had a right of first refusal. VIVA gave ABS-CBN 3 packages (36 titles) to choose from. VP for ABS Charo Santos-Concio wrote VIVA that they are not accepting the list because there were only 10 titles there that they could potentially purchase. ABS asked for another list, saying they had quite an attractive offer to make. - VIVA gave ABS a new list: 52 original movie titles (never before aired on TV) and 104 reruns. VIVAs proposal was P60M (P30M cash, P30M TV spots) for 52 originals and 52 reruns. - Del Rosario (VIVAs rep) and Eugenio Lopez III had a mtg re this in Tamarind Grill Restaurant. Accdg to ABSCBN, the mtg culminated in Del Rosario accepting ABSCBNs offer of P35M for 52 of the films VIVA was selling for P60M plus Maging Sino Ka Man. - VIVA said this wasnt their agreement and that they refuse to sell anything less the 104-movie package for P60M. In the meantime, RBS bought the 104-film package (which included Maging Sino Ka Man) for P60M. There were ads in the newspapers for the airing of the movie on Channel 7. - ABSCBN filed a case in RTC to enjoin RBS from airing 14 VIVA films, including Maging Sino Ka Man. RTC granted a

Page

preliminary injunction; but lifted the same after RBS put up a counterbond. - ABSCBN filed a petition in the CA to challenge the RTC decision. CA granted TRO, but eventually dismissed ABSCBNs petition and made them pay for actual, moral and exemplary damages and attys fees to RBS, and attys fees to VIVA. ISSUE WON RBS may recover damages from ABSCBN HELD: NO ACTUAL DAMAGES - Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to compensation for actual damages only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. The indemnification shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered, but also that of the profits that the obligee failed to obtain. In contracts and quasi-contracts the damages which may be awarded are dependent on whether the obligor acted with good faith or otherwise. In case of good faith, the damages recoverable are those which are the natural and probable consequences of the breach of the obligation and which the parties have foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen at the time of the constitution of the obligation. If the obligor acted with fraud, bad faith, malice, or wanton attitude, he shall be responsible for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of the obligation. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of, whether or not such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant. - Actual damages may likewise be recovered for loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent personal injury, or for injury to the plaintiff's business standing or commercial credit. - RBS claims actual damages based on Arts 19-21 for the injunction for having to put up a counterbond. The SC said that since ABS had not posted a bond and was in fact still challenging it, RBS didnt have to put up the counterbond. - RBS also claims actual damages for the advertisements for the airing of Maging Sino Ka Man. The SC said that ABS is not liable for lack of sufficient basis. The prelim injunction was lifted by RTC upon RBS paying the counterbond, and not on any legal and factual basis. ATTYS FEES - As regards attorney's fees, the law is clear that in the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees may be recovered as actual or compensatory damages under any of the circumstances provided for in Article 2208 of the Civil Code. - The general rule is that attorney's fees cannot be recovered as part of damages because of the policy that no premium should be placed on the right to litigate. They are not to be awarded every time a party wins a suit. The power of the court to award attorney's fees under Article 2208 demands factual, legal, and equitable justification. Even when a claimant is compelled to litigate with third persons or to incur expenses to protect his rights, still attorney's fees may not be awarded where no sufficient showing of bad faith could be reflected in a party's persistence in a case other than an erroneous conviction of the righteousness of his cause. MORAL DAMAGES - Moral damages are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. The award is not meant to enrich the complainant at the expense of the defendant, but to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversion, or amusements that will serve to obviate the moral suffering he

has undergone. It is aimed at the restoration, within the limits of the possible, of the spiritual status quo ante, and should be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. - The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of a corporation because, being an artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses. It cannot, therefore, experience physical suffering and mental anguish which can be experienced only by one having a nervous system. The award for damages must be set aside, since RBS is a corporation. EXEMPLARY DAMAGES - These are imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to moral, temperate, liquidated, or compensatory damages. They are recoverable in criminal cases as part of the civil liability when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances; in quasi-delicts, if the defendant acted with gross negligence; and in contracts and quasi-contracts, if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. - The claim of RBS against ABS-CBN is not based on contract, quasi-contract, delict, or quasi-delict. The claims for moral and exemplary damages can only be based on Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code. - Arts 19-21 have at their very core the common element of malice or bad faith. Such intentional design to do a wrongful act must be proved by evidence. Here, ABSCBN was honestly convinced of the merits of its cause after it had undergone serious negotiations culminating in its formal submission of a draft contract. Settled is the rule that the adverse result of an action does not per se make the action wrongful and subject the actor to damages, for the law could not have meant to impose a penalty on the right to litigate. If damages result from a person's exercise of a right, it is damnum absque injuria. Disposition Petition Granted. CA decision reversed, except to unappealed award of Attys damages of Viva Films.

NPC v PHILIPP BROTHERS OCEANIC 369 SCRA 629 SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ; Nov 20, 2001 NATURE: Appeal by certioriari to review and set aside the decision of the Court of Appeals FACTS - The National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) issued invitations to bid for the supply and delivery of 120,000 metric tons of imported coal for its Batangas Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plant in Calaca, Batangas. The Philipp Brothers Oceanic, Inc. (PHIBRO) prequalified and was allowed to participate as one of the bidders. After the public bidding was conducted, PHIBRO's bid was accepted. NAPOCOR's acceptance was conveyed in a letter. PHIBRO sent word to NAPOCOR that industrial disputes might soon plague Australia, the shipment's point of origin, which could seriously hamper PHIBRO's ability to supply the needed coal. PHIBRO again apprised NAPOCOR of the situation in Australia, particularly informing the latter that the ship owners therein are not willing to load cargo unless a "strike-free" clause is incorporated in the charter party or the contract of carriage. In order to hasten the transfer of coal, PHIBRO proposed to NAPOCOR that they equally share the burden of a "strike-free" clause. NAPOCOR refused. - Subsequently, PHIBRO received from NAPOCOR a confirmed and workable letter of credit. Instead of delivering the coal on or before the thirtieth day after receipt of the Letter of Credit, as agreed upon by the parties in the July contract, PHIBRO effected its first shipment only on November 17, 1987. - Consequently, in October 1987, NAPOCOR once more advertised for the delivery of coal to its Calaca thermal plant. PHIBRO participated anew in this subsequent bidding. On

Page

November 24, 1987, NAPOCOR disapproved PHIBRO's application for pre-qualification to bid for not meeting the minimum requirements. Upon further inquiry, PHIBRO found that the real reason for the disapproval was its purported failure to satisfy NAPOCOR's demand for damages due to the delay in the delivery of the first coal shipment. - This prompted PHIBRO to file an action for damages with application for injunction against NAPOCOR with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 57, Makati City. In its complaint, PHIBRO alleged that NAPOCOR's act of disqualifying it in the October 1987 bidding and in all subsequent biddings was tainted with malice and bad faith. PHIBRO prayed for actual, moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. - In its answer, NAPOCOR averred that the strikes in Australia could not be invoked as reason for the delay in the delivery of coal because PHIBRO itself admitted that as of July 28, 1987 those strikes had already ceased. And, even assuming that the strikes were still ongoing, PHIBRO should have shouldered the burden of a "strike-free" clause because their contract was "C and F Calaca, Batangas, Philippines," meaning, the cost and freight from the point of origin until the point of destination would be for the account of PHIBRO. Furthermore, NAPOCOR claimed that due to PHIBRO's failure to deliver the coal on time, it was compelled to purchase coal from ASEA at a higher price. NAPOCOR claimed for actual damages in the amount of P12,436,185.73, representing the increase in the price of coal, and a claim of P500,000.00 as litigation expenses. - Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued. The trial court decided in favor of PHIBRO. Unsatisfied, NAPOCOR elevated the case to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals rendered a Decision affirming in toto the Decision of the Regional Trial Court. ISSUE WON PHIBRO is entitled to damages HELD: NO - NAPOCOR was not bound under any contract to approve PHIBRO's pre-qualification requirements. In fact, NAPOCOR had expressly reserved its right to reject bids. And where the government as advertiser, availing itself of that right, makes its choice in rejecting any or all bids, the losing bidder has no cause to complain nor right to dispute that choice unless an unfairness or injustice is shown. - Owing to the discretionary character of the right involved in this case, the propriety of NAPOCOR's act should therefore be judged on the basis of the general principles regulating human relations, the forefront provision of which is Article 19 of the Civil Code which provides that "every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith." Accordingly, a person will be protected only when he acts in the legitimate exercise of his right, that is, when he acts with prudence and in good faith; but not when he acts with negligence or abuse. 3 - NAPOCOR's act of disapproving PHIBRO's application for pre-qualification to bid was without any intent to injure or a purposive motive to perpetrate damage. Apparently, NAPOCOR acted on the strong conviction that PHIBRO had a "seriously-impaired" track record. NAPOCOR cannot be faulted from believing so. We cannot fault NAPOCOR if it mistook PHIBRO's unexpected offer a mere attempt on the latter's part to undercut ASEA or an indication of PHIBRO's inconsistency. The circumstances warrant such contemplation. - One who acted pursuant to the sincere belief that another willfully committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the government cannot be considered to have acted in bad faith. Bad faith has always been a question of intention. It is that corrupt motive that operates in the mind. As understood in law,

it contemplates a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or with some motive of self-interest or ill-will or for ulterior purpose. While confined in the realm of thought, its presence may be ascertained through the party's actuation or through circumstantial evidence. The circumstances under which NAPOCOR disapproved PHIBRO's pre-qualification to bid do not show an intention to cause damage to the latter. The measure it adopted was one of self-protection. Consequently, we cannot penalize NAPOCOR for the course of action it took. NAPOCOR cannot be made liable for actual, moral and exemplary damages. - Basic is the rule that to recover actual damages, the amount of loss must not only be capable of proof but must actually be proven with reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof or best evidence obtainable of the actual amount thereof. A court cannot merely rely on speculations, conjectures, or guesswork as to the fact and amount of damages. Thus, while indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered, but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain, it is imperative that the basis of the alleged unearned profits is not too speculative and conjectural as to show the actual damages which may be suffered on a future period. - The award of moral damages is likewise improper. To reiterate, NAPOCOR did not act in bad faith. Moreover, moral damages are not, as a general rule, granted to a corporation. While it is true that besmirched reputation is included in moral damages, it cannot cause mental anguish to a corporation, unlike in the case of a natural person, for a corporation has no reputation in the sense that an individual has, and besides, it is inherently impossible for a corporation to suffer mental anguish. - Neither can we award exemplary damages under Article 2234 of the Civil Code. Before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate, or compensatory damages. - This Court has also laid down the rule that in the absence of stipulation, a winning party may be awarded attorney's fees only in case plaintiff's action or defendant's stand is so untenable as to amount to gross and evident bad faith. This cannot be said of the case at bar. NAPOCOR is justified in resisting PHIBRO's claim for damages.

3. NOMINAL
Article 2221, CC. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. Article 2222, CC. The court may award nominal damages in every obligation arising from any source enumerated in article 1157, or in every case where any property right has been invaded. Article 2223, CC. The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further contest upon the right involved and all accessory questions, as between the parties to the suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.

Page

VENTANILLA V CENTENO PADILLA; January 28, 1961 NATURE: APPEAL FACTS - Ventanilla instituted this action to recover damages against his lawyer, Atty. Centeno for neglecting to perfect within the reglementary period his (V) appeal from an adverse judgment rendered by the CFI of Manila. - TCs facts showed that the required appeal bond was not filed by Atty. Centeno. The fact that the record on appeal was admitted for filing is the best evidence that Atty. Centeno had not in fact filed any appeal bond. The record on appeal was disapproved because it was filed out of time and no appeal bond had been filed by the plaintiff. - TC: rendered judgment in favor of V; ordered Centeno to pay V the sum of P200 as nominal damages and the costs. - V appealed to the CA which certified the case to this Court on the ground that only questions of law are raised. The defendant did not appeal. ISSUE WON TC erred in not ordering the Centeno to pay him actual or compensatory, moral, temperate or moderate, and exemplary or corrective damages; in ordering that only the sum of P200 be paid to him, and not P2,000 as nominal damages; and in not ordering that the sum of P500 as attorney's fee be paid as well. HELD: NO Reasoning AS REGARDS ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES: - V is not entitled to such damages as his basis is highly speculative. - A2199 NCC provides: Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory damages. - Malonzo vs. Galang: He who claims actual or compensatory damages must establish and prove by competent evidence actual pecuniary loss. - Ventanillas allegation that by Centenos negligence in not paying the appeal bond of P60, V lost his chance to recover from the defendants therein the sum of P4,000 and moral and actual damages, which V could have recovered if the appeal had duly been perfected, indicates that his claim for actual or compensatory damages is highly speculative. AS REGARDS MORAL DAMAGES: - Since the VENTANILLAS cause of action for recovery of moral damages is not predicated upon any of those specifically enumerated (under A2219, Arts. 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34 and 35 on the chapter on human relations (par. 10, Art. 2219) TC did not err in declining to award moral damages to him -V claims that he suffered mental anguish upon learning that his appeal had not been perfected within the reglementary period due to the Centeno's negligence; serious anxiety upon learning that his adversary had won by a mere technicality; besmirched reputation for losing the opportunity to substantiate his claim made while testifying in open court that he was entitled to collect the sum of P4,000 and damages from the defendants in civil No. 18833; and wounded feelings for the Centenos failure to remain faithful to his client and worthy of his trust and confidence. (SEE A2217, 2219 AND 2220 NCC) -Malonzo vs. Galang: . . .Art. 2219 specifically mentions "quasi-delicts causing physical injuries," as an instance when moral damages may be allowed, thereby implying that all other quasi-delicts not resulting in physical injuries are excluded (Strebel vs. Figueras, G.R. L-4722, Dec. 29, 1954), excepting, of course, the special torts referred to in Art. 309 (par. 9, Art. 2219) and

in Arts. 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34 and 35 on the chapter on human relations (par. 10, Art. 2219). CONCERNING TEMPERATE OR MODERATE DAMAGES: - Considering that he is not entitled to actual or compensatory damages but has been awarded nominal damages by the TC, such award precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages, and so TC did not err in refusing to award temperate or moderate damages to the Ventanilla AS REGARDS EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE DAMAGES: - It cannot be recovered as a matter of right and the court will decide whether or not they should be adjudicated, if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. TC didnt err in not giving any. NOMINAL DAMAGES - Considering the circumstances and the degree of negligence committed by ATTY CENTENO in not depositing on time the appeal bond and filing the record on appeal within the extension period granted by the court, which brought about the refusal by the TCto allow the record on appeal, the amount of P200 awarded by the TC to VENTANILLA as nominal damages may seem exiguous. - Nevertheless, considering that nominal damages are not for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded; and that even if the appeal in civil case No. 18833 had been duly perfected, it was not an assurance that the appellant would succeed in recovering the amount he had claimed in his complaint, the amount of P2,000 the appellant seeks to recover as nominal damages is excessive. - A2221 of NCC provides: Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. - A2216; Del Castillo vs. Guerrero[1960]: The assessment of nominal damages is left to the discretion of the court, according to the circumstances of the case. AS REGARDS ATTORNEY'S FEES: - since the V's claim does not fall under any of those enumerated in A2208 NCC, the V may not be compelled to satisfy it. Disposition TCs judgment affirmed ROBES-FRANCISCO REALTY V CFI AND MILLAN MUOZ-PALMA; October 30, 1978 FACTS - Robes-Francisco Realty sold to Millan a parcel of land. Millan complied and paid. She made repeated demands to execute final deed of sale and for issuance to her of TCT over the lot. Parties executed deed of absolute sale. But corp failed to cause issuance of TCT because title was included among properties of corp mortgaged to GSIS to secure an obligation. Hence, a complaint for specific performance and damages. ISSUE WON Robes-Francisco is liable for damages HELD : YES - Robes-Francisco is guilty of delay, amounting to nonperformance. It is liable for damages under Art 1170 of CC. - But Robes-Francisco contends that Millan is bound by terms of provision and cant recover more than what is agreed upon. This argument is devoid of merit. We would agree if the clause were to be a penal clause. But this clause doesnt convey any penalty. - Unfortunately, vendee submitted her case below without presenting evidence on actual damages suffered by her. - But it is obvious that right of vendee was violated by petitioner

Page

and this entitles her at least to NOMINAL DAMAGES. - NOMINAL DAMAGES are not for indemnification of loss suffered but for vindication or recognition of a right. - NOMINAL DAMAGES are damages in name only and not in fact, and are allowed simply in recognition of a technical injury. - P20,000.00 is excessive. The admitted fact that petitioner corporation failed to convey a transfer certificate of title to respondent Milian because the subdivision property was mortgaged to the GSIS does not in itself show that there was bad faith or fraud. Bad faith is not to be presumed. Moreover, there was the expectation of the vendor that arrangements were possible for the GSIS to make partial releases of the subdivision lots.

PEOPLE V GOPIO 346 SCRA 408 MENDOZA; November 29, 2000 NATURE: Appeal from Decision of RTC FACTS - Princess Millano, 10 years old, went to Agustin Gopios store to buy cooking oil. However, it was closed. As Millano was about to leave, Gopio called her. When she came near him, he seized her, brought her inside his empty house, brought her to his bedroom and raped her. As she would not stop crying, he eventually let her go. - The victim rushed home. Although she felt intense pain and was actually bleeding, she did not inform her mother of what happened to her. - Victim related that she was molested by Gopio in 2 other occasions in the same year. The first happened when she went to her godsisters house and found the accused playing cards. She was about to leave when she saw her godsisters brother crying inside the room. She went inside and the accused followed him, locked the door and caressed her private parts. The second instance was when the accused followed her on her way to her grandfathers house to get the pail requested by her aunt. - The victim did not confide to her family about these incidents because she was very afraid of accused-appellant and of what her parents would do to her. Likewise, the victim was ashamed and worried that her friends would spread the news regarding her unfortunate experience. - Victims mother testified about victims age. She also said that after the incident, her daughter became inattentive and withdrawn. Her daughters grades even dropped. Subsequently, she brought the victim to the Municipal Health Center because the latter has been experiencing navel pains. This is when she discovered that her child got raped. She presented receipts covering medical, transportation, food, and other expenses which she allegedly incurred on account of the incident. - Gopio denied allegations and said that he was in Novaliches in May and June 1995 to sell fish. He claims that there was animosity between their families which started when she failed to bring along victims mother to the market to sell fish. - RTC found Gopio guilty of statutory rape and ordered him to pay P3,727 as actual damages and P30,000 as moral damages. ISSUES 1. WON accused-appellant was guilty beyond reasonable doubt 2. WON award of damages was correct HELD 1. YES - On alibi: Victim positively identified accused-appellant as the perpetrator of the crime and categorically testified that she had

been raped by accused-appellant. When a rape victims testimony is straightforward and candid, unshaken by rigid cross-examination and unflawed by inconsistencies or contradictions in its material points, the same must be given full faith and credit. - On victims failure to immediately report incident: The victims delay in reporting the offense is not an indication of a fabricated charge. Victim feared that accused-appellant would hurt her and her family and that her friends would spread the news about her plight. Had it not been for that medical examination, the victim would not have told them about the rape committed by accused-appellant. This explains the delay in reporting the crime in this case. - On failure of the information to indicate the approximate time of the commission of the offense: The phrase in the information, that sometime in 1995. . . has sufficiently apprised accused-appellant of the crime which he allegedly committed in 1995. It bears stressing that, in the case of rape, the date of commission is not an essential element of the offense, what is material being the occurrence thereof and not the time of its commission. In any event, it is now too late in the day to question the form or substance of the information because when he entered his plea at his arraignment, accused-appellant did not object to the sufficiency of the information against him. - On irregularity of arrest: He failed to raise objections to his arrest at the earliest possible opportunity. The record shows that he voluntarily entered a plea of not guilty when he was arraigned, thereby waiving his right to question any irregularity in his arrest. 2. NO - The award of actual damages must be deleted in the absence of proof required by Art. 2199 of the Civil Code. To be entitled to actual and compensatory damages, there must be competent proof constituting evidence of the actual amount thereof, such as receipts showing the expenses incurred on account of the rape incident. In this case, only the laboratory fee issued by the hospital amounting to P350 was duly receipted. The rest of the documents were merely a doctors prescription and a handwritten list of food expenses. - Nevertheless, under Article 2221 of the Civil Code, nominal damages are adjudicated in order that the right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. As has been held, whenever there has been a violation of an ascertained legal right, although no actual damages resulted or none are shown, the award of nominal damages is proper. In this case, the victims family clearly incurred medical expenses due to the rape committed by accused-appellant. The victim suffered from pains in her navel which required her physical examination. An award of P2k as nominal damages is thus appropriate under the circumstances. - Based on current rulings, the award of moral damages should be increased to P50k irrespective of proof thereof. - In addition, the victim is entitled to the award of P50k as civil indemnity which must be given even if there is neither allegation nor evidence presented as basis therefore. Disposition RTC decision modified. Accused-appellant is ordered to pay the victim the amounts of P2k by way of nominal damages, P50k as moral damages, and the additional amount of P50k as civil indemnity, plus the costs of the suit.

Page

10

ARMOVIT V CA (NORTHWEST AIRLINES) 184 SCRA 476 GANGAYCO; April 20, 1990 FACTS - In October 1981, Dr. Herman Armovit and his family decided to spend their Christmas holidays with relatives and friends in the Philippines so they purchased from Northwest Airlines 3 round trip airline tickets from the US to Manila and back, plus 3 tickets for the rest of the children, though not involved in the suit. Each ticket of the petitioners which was in the handwriting of Northwests tickets sales agent contains the following entry on the Manila to Tokyo portion of the return flight: "from Manila to Tokyo, NW flight 002, date 17 January, time 10:30 AM Status, OK" - On their return trip from Manila to the US scheduled on January 17, 1982, they arrived at the check-in counter of the airline at the Manila International Airport at 9:15 in the morning, which is a good one hour and fifteen minutes ahead of the 10:30 AM scheduled flight time recited in their tickets. They were rudely informed that they cannot be accommodated inasmuch as Flight 002 scheduled at 9:15 am was already taking off and the 10:30 AM flight time entered in their plane tickets was erroneous. - Previous to the date of departure Armovit re-confirmed their reservations through their representative Ernesto Madriaga who personally presented the 3 tickets at the airlines Roxas Boulevard office. The departure time in the 3 tickets was not changed when re-confimed. Their names appeared in the passenger manifest and confirmed as Passenger Nos. 306, 307, and 308, Flight 002. - Dr. Armovit protested in extreme agitation that because of the bump-off he will not be able to keep his appointments with his patients in the US. They suffered anguish, wounded feelings, and serious anxiety day and night of January 17th until the morning of January 18th when they were finally informed that seats will be available for them on the flight that day. - The RTC ruled in favor of the Armovits and ordered Northwest to pay actual (P1,300), exemplary (P1,100,000) and moral (P1,100,000) damages as well as attorneys fees. The CA affirmed but eliminated the moral damages on the ground that petitioners did not take the witness stand to testify on their social humiliation, wounded feelings and anxiety, and that the breach of contract was not malicious or fraudulent. It also reduced the exemplary damages to P170,000. Armovits motion for reconsideration was denied. ISSUE WON the CA erred in deleting the award of moral damages HELD 1. NO. Ratio A contract to transport passengers is quite different in kind and degree from any other contractual relation. And this is because of the relation which an air carrier sustains with the public. Its business is mainly with the traveling public. It invites people to avail of the comforts and advantages it offers. The contract of air carriage, therefore, generates a relation attended with a public duty, Neglect or malfeasance of the carrier's employees, naturally, could give ground for an action for damages Passengers do not contract merely for transportation. They have the right to be treated by the carrier's employees with kindness, respect, courtesy and due consideration. They are entitled to be protected against personal misconduct, injurious language, indignities and abuses from such employees. So it is that any rude or discourteous conduct on the part of employees towards a passenger gives the latter an action for damages against the carrier. [Citing Air France v Carrascoso]

Reasoning - The gross negligence committed by Northwest in the issuance of the tickets with entries as to the time of the flight, the failure to correct such erroneous entries and the manner by which petitioners were rudely informed that they were bumped off are clear indicia of such malice and bad faith and establish that Northwest committed a breach of contract which entitles petitioners to moral damages. - The CA observed that the Armovits failed to take the witness stand and testify on the matter. It overlooked however, that their failure to appear in court to testify was explained by them. The assassination of Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr. on August 21, 1983 following the year they were bumped off caused turmoil in the country. This turmoil spilled over to the year 1984 when they were scheduled to testify. However, the violent demonstrations in the country were sensationalized in the U.S. media so they were advised to refrain from returning to the Philippines at the time. - Nevertheless, Atty. Raymund Armovit, brother of Dr. Armovit, took the witness stand as he was with the petitioners from the time they checked in up to the time of their ultimate departure. He was a witness when the check-in officer rudely informed the Armovits that their flight had already taken off, while Dr. Armovit remonstrated that their tickets reflected their flight time to be 10:30 AM; that in anger and frustration, Dr. Armovit told the said check-in-officer that he had to be accommodated that morning so that he could attend to all his appointments in the US; that Jacqueline Armovit also complained about not being able to report for work at the expiration of her leave of absence; that while the Armovits had to accept Northwest's offer for hotel accommodations at the Philippine Village Hotel so that they could follow up and wait for their flight out of Manila the following day, they did not use their meal coupons because of the limitations thereon so they had to spend for lunch, dinner, and breakfast in the sum of P1,300 while waiting to be flown out of Manila; that Dr. Armovit had to forego the professional fees for the medical appointments he missed due to his inability to take the January 17 flight; that the petitioners were finally able to fly out of Manila on January 18, 1982, but were assured of this flight only on the very morning of that day, so that they experienced anxiety until they were assured seats for that flight. - No doubt Atty. Raymund Armovit's testimony adequately and sufficiently established the serious anxiety, wounded feelings and social humiliation that petitioners suffered upon having been bumped off. However, considering that Northwest took care of their accommodations while waiting and boarding them in the flight back to the US, the following day, the Court finds that the petitioners are entitled to moral damages in the amount of P100,000 each. - To provide an example for the public good, an award of exemplary damages is also proper. The award of the CA is adequate. Nevertheless, the deletion of the nominal damages by the CA is well-taken since there is an award of actual damages. Nominal damages cannot co-exist with actual or compensatory damages. Disposition Petition is granted. The judgment of the CA is hereby modified such that Northwest shall pay the following: (a) actual damages in favor of Dr. Armovit in the sum of P1,300 with interest at the legal rate from January 17, 1982; (b) moral damages at P100,000 and exemplary damages and P100,000 in favor of Dr. Armovit; (c) moral damages of P100,000 and exemplary damages of P50,000 in favor of Mrs. Dora Armovit; (d) moral damages of P100,000 and exemplary damages in the amount of P20,000 in favor of Miss Jacqueline Armovit; and (e) attorney's fees at 5% of the total awards, plus the cost of suit.

Page

11

4. TEMPERATE
Article 2224, CC. Temperate or moderate damages, which are more than nominal but less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount can not, from the nature of the case, be provided with certainty. Article 2225, CC. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the circumstances.

PLENO V CA (PHILIPPINE PAPER PRODUCTS INC ET AL) 307 SCRA 675 GUTTIERREZ JR; May 9, 1988 NATURE Petition for review on certiorari of CA decision which modified the CFI decision in a vehicular accident case and reduced by one half the award for temperate damages, moral damages, and attorneys fees from P430,000 to P215,000. the awards for actual damages in the amount of P48,244 and exemplary damages in the amount of P50,000 were affirmed FACTS - Philippine Paper Products is the owner of a delivery truck, and one of their drivers, Florante de Luna, in a reckless and imprudent manner, by driving the vehicle at a great speed, without taking any precautions to avoid accidents, hit, bumped, and sideswiped plaintiffs Volkswagen Delivery Van, driven by plaintiff, causing the Van to swerve and ram into the rear part of another truck - As a result of the accident, plaintiff was hospitalized, suffered injuries affecting his brain, acted beyond normalcy at times - Petitioner questioned the set off since there was no call or notice for the payment of the unpaid subscription, and that the alleged obligation is not enforceable. - The NLRC held that a stockholder who fails to pay his unpaid subscription on call becomes a debtor of the corporation and that the set-off of said obligation against the wages and other due to petitioner is not contrary to law, morals, public policy ISSUES 1. WON the employer's liability in quasi-delict is subsidiary 2. WON the appellant court was correct in reducing the amount of damages awarded to the petitioner HELD 1. NO Reasoning - We sustain the view of the petitioner that the ability of an employer in quasi-delict is primary and solidary and not subsidiary. This, we have ruled in a long line of cases. 2. NO Reasoning - The Court of Appeals affirmed the awards of damages. Nevertheless, as stated earlier, the appellate court reduced the amount of temperate and moral damages as well as the amount of attorney's fees on the ground that the awards were "too high" .The award of temperate damages was reduced by the appellate court on the ground that the amount of P200,000.00 is rather "too high" especially considering the fact that the driver De Luna is a mere driver and defendantappellant Corporation is only subsidiarily liable thereof. The award was reduced to P100,000.00. - The award of temperate, moral, and exemplary damages as well as attorney's fees lies upon the discretion of the court based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

- The court's discretion is, of course, subject to the condition that the award for damages is not excessive under the attendant facts and circumstance of the case. - Temperate damages are included within the context of compensatory damages. - In the case of moral damages, the yardstick shaould be that the "amount awarded should not be palpably and scandalously excessive" so as to indicate that it was the result of passion, prejudice or corruption on the part of the trial court. The actual losses sustained by the aggrieved parties and the gravity of the injuries must be considered in arriving at reasonable levels - The lower court's awards of damages are more consonant 1 with the factual circumstances of the instant case. The trial court's findings of facts are clear and well-developed. Each item of damages is adequately supported by evidence on record. On the other hand, there are no substantial reasons and no references to any misimpressions of facts in the appellate decision. The Court of Appeals has shown no sufficient reasons for altering factual findings which appear correct. We, therefore, affirm the lower court's awards of damages and hold that the appellate court's reduction of the amounts of temperate and moral damages is not justified. However, we modify the award of attorney's fees to P20,000.00 which we deem to be just and equitable under the circumstances. Disposition instant petition is GRANTED. The questioned decision is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The decision of the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Pasig) in Civil Case No. 16024 is AFFIRMED in all respects, except for the award of attorney's fees which is reduced to P20,000.00.

PEOPLE V SINGH 360 SCRA 404 BUENA; June 29, 2001 NATURE Appellants Balwinder, Malkit, Mohinder and Dalvir, all surnamed Singh, were convicted of the crime of Murder in Criminal Case No. 8683 for killing Surinder Singh, and Frustrated Murder in Criminal Cases No. 8682 for stabbing Dilbag Singh. Each of them were sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for murder, and the indeterminate penalty of 8 years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as maximum for frustrated murder.
The trial court based the amounts of damages awarded to the petitioner on the following circumstances: Coming now to the damages suffered by plaintiff Maximo Pleno, it is not controverted that Pleno was hospitalized for about five months beginning December 21, 1971, the day of the incident, up to May 9, 1972. While in the hospital, he underwent several major operations on his legs and in spite of Id operations, a deformity still resulted and that his left leg is shorter than the right. The medical expenses, hospital bills and doctor's fees were properly exhibited and not rebutted by defendants. This being the case, actual expenses of P48,244.08 may be awarded. As to the loss or impairment of earning capacity, there is no doubt that Pleno is an enterpreneur and the founder of his own corporation, the Mayon Ceramics Corporation. It appears also that he is an industrious and resourceful person with several projects in line and were it not for the incident, might have pushed them through. On the day of the incident, Pleno was driving homeward with geologist Langley after an ocular inspection of the site of the Mayon Ceramics Corporation. His actual income however has not been sufficiently established so that this Court cannot award actual damages, but, an award of temperate or moderate damages may still be made on loss or impairment of earning capacity. That Pleno sustained a permanent deformity due to a shortened left leg and that he also suffers from double vision in his left eye is also established. Because of this, he suffers from some inferiority complex and is no longer active in business as well as in social life. In similar cases as in Borromeo v. Manila Electric Railroad Co., 44 Phil 165; Cordage, et al. v. LTB Co., et al., L-11037, Dec. 29,1960, and in Araneta, et al. v. Arreglado, et al., L-11394, Sept. 9, 1958, the proper award of damages were given. There is also no doubt that due to the incident, Pleno underwent physical suffering, mental anguish, fight, severe arudety and that he also underwent several major operations. As previously stated, Pleno is the founder of Mayon Ceramics Corporation, manufacturer of the now famous Crown Lynn ceramic wares. He is a mechanical engineer and the topnotcher of the professional examination for mechanical engineering in 1938. From the record, most if not all of his children excelled in academic studies here and abroad. The suffering, both mental and physical, which he experienced, the anxiety and fright that he underwent are sufficiently proved, if not patent. He is therefore entitled to moral damages. Pleno is also entitled to exemplary damages since it appears that gross negligence was committed in the hiring of driver de Luna. In spite of his past record, he was still hired by the corporation. As regards de Luna, the very fact that he left the scene of the incident without assisting the victims and without reporting to the authorities entitles an award of exemplary damages, so as to serve as an example that in cases of accidents of this kind, the drivers involved should not leave their victims behind but should stop to assist the victims or if this is not possible, to report the matter immediately to the authorities. That the corporation did not also report the matter to the authorities and that their lawyer would attempt to bribe the police officers in order that the incident would be kept a secret shows that the corporation ratified the act of their employees and such act also shows bad faith. Hence, Id corporation is able to pay exemplary damages. The award of attorney's fees is also proper in this case considering the circumstances and that it took more than five years of trial to finish this case. Also, plaintiffs counsel prepared lengthy and exhausive memorandum. (pp- 4850, Amended Joint Record on Appeal)
1

Page

12

Page

FACTS - Dilbag Singh, private complainant for frustrated murder in Criminal Case No. 8682, recounts that on November 26, 1993, at around 7:30 in the morning while he was cleaning his motorbike in front of the Mendiola Apartment in Barangay Canlalay, Bian, Laguna, Dalvir, Balwinder, Gurmok, Jarnail, Amarjit, Mohinder, Dial, Kuldip- all surnamed Singh-Johander Singh Dhillon, and Malkit Singh Dhillon arrived, shouting foul remarks in their native language and demanding Surinder Singh to come out of the apartment. When Surinder Singh came out of his apartment, Dalvir Singh tried to stab him but Surinder Singh was able to move away. Dalvir Singh told his companions to hold Surinder Singh as he will kill him. Thereafter, Dial Singh and Johinder Singh each held the right and left arms of Surinder Singh, with Kuldip Singh pushing Surinder Singh on his back. Dalvir Singh then stabbed Surinder Singh, hitting him on the right side of his stomach, and causing him to fall on the ground. Dial Singh remarked that Surinder Singh failed to give money and if others will likewise refuse, the same fate will befall them. As Surinder Singh tried to get up, Malkit Singh Dhillon and Jarnail Singh started hitting him with lead pipes all over his body, while Johinder Singh and Dial Singh punched and kicked Surinder. Amarjit Singh, who was holding a gun, warned everyone not to help Surinder Singh or else he will shoot. Thereat, when all these things were going on, private complainant Dilbag Singh tried to stop them but Balwinder Singh stabbed him on the left side of his back. Gurmok Singh likewise stabbed him with a bolo, but he was not hit as he was able to move to one side. After that, the ten (10) accused Indians left. Dilbag Singh and Surinder Singh, both injured, were brought to the Perpetual Help Hospital, Bian, Laguna, by Jaswinder Singh, Johinder Singh Gill, Balwinder Singh Gill and Alwan Singh, for treatment. There, Surinder Singh was pronounced dead on arrival. - The events, according to appellants, happened in this wise. Appellant Dalvir Singh testified that on November 26, 1993, at around 7:30 in the morning, he was conducting his buy and sell business along Brgy. Canlalay, Bian, Laguna. While collecting from his customers, he was accosted by Jaswinder, Dilbag and Surinder Singh to stop at the corner of the street. When he stopped, he alighted from his motorcycle. Jaswinder, Dilbag and Surinder Singh accused him of squealing their status to the immigration authorities. Then, Jaswinder Singh punched him. Appellant Dalvir Singh retaliated by slapping Jaswinder Singh afterwhich, Jaswinder Singh, went inside his apartment to get a pipe. When Surinder Singh was about to stab him, he wrestled the knife from him and, in the process, private complainant Dilbag Singh was stabbed on his back with the same knife. As Dalvir Singh grappled for the possession of the knife from Surinder Singh, both of them fell down, with him landing on top of Surinder Singh and that was the time when Surinder Singh was stabbed on the right portion of his stomach. Then, Surinder Singh lost his grip and appellant Dalvir Singh was able to get hold of the knife. Appellant Dalvir Singh was so nervous that he left the place on his motorcycle while holding the knife. He threw the knife along the highway of Bian, Laguna. - After trial, appellants were convicted of the crime charged, thus "WHEREFORE, the guilt of accused Balwinder Singh, Malkit Singh Dhillon, Mohinder Singh, Dalvir Singh and Dial Singh having been established beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of frustrated murder in Criminal Case No. 8282 and murder in Criminal Case 8683 defined and penalized in Articles 248 and 250 of the Revised Penal Code, this Court hereby sentences them (except Dial Singh who died during the presentation of defense evidence on the main case) as follows:

"Criminal Case No. 8682: "1. each to suffer an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of from eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal maximum; "2. jointly and severally, to pay private complainant Dilbag Singh the amounts of P16,000 representing his hospitalization and medical expenses, and P30,000 for and as attorneys fees; and "3. jointly and severally, to pay the costs of suit. "Criminal Case No. 8683: "1. each to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; "2. jointly and severally, to pay the heirs of Surinder Singh the following sums: a) P50,000.00 as civil indemnity; b) P41,500.00 representing funeral, wake and transportation expenses; c) P5,760,000.00 for lost earnings/income; d) P400.00 for hospitalization expenses; e) P50,000.00 for moral damages; and f) P500,000.00 for and as attorneys fees; and "3. jointly and severally, to pay the costs of suit. "Since accused Jarnail Singh, Gurmok Singh, Amarjit Singh, Johinder Singh and Kuldip Singh have remained at-large to date, in order not to clog the docket of this court, let the records of these two cases be sent to the files and warrant be issued for their immediate arrest. ISSUE WON the court a quo erred in awarding excessive damages against accused-appellants HELD : YES Reasoning - In Criminal Case No. 8682 for frustrated murder, the trial court awarded private complainant Dilbag Singh the amount of P16,000.00 representing his hospitalization and medical expenses, and P 30,000.00 as attorneys fees. For his hospitalization and medical expenses, the receipts submitted to support said claim amounted only to P370.50. Hence, private complainant Dilbag Singh is entitled only to the said amount. The award of attorneys fees is hereby deleted. Nonetheless, private complaint is entitled to moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 for the suffering he endured from appellants felonious acts. - In Criminal Case No. 8683 for murder, the following amount of actual damages were duly proven P16,500.00 funeral expenses and air ticket/freight of the cadaver $600.27. The amount of P400.00 for hospitalization expenses should be deleted for not being supported by evidence. The trial courts award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 moral damages are affirmed. The award of P500,000.00 as attorneys fees and P5,760,000 as compensation for loss of earning capacity, are likewise deleted for lack of basis. Awards for loss of earning capacity partake of damages which must be proven not only by credible and satisfactory evidence, but also by unbiased proof. The testimony of Balwinder Singh Gill, first cousin of the deceased, on the alleged income of the deceased while in the Philippines, is not enough. The best evidence to substantiate income earned by foreigners while in the Philippines is the payment of taxes with the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Absent such proof, bare allegation is insufficient. Nevertheless, considering that the definite proof of pecuniary loss cannot be offered, and the fact of loss has been established, appellants shall pay the heirs of Surinder Singh temperate damages in the amount of P200,000.00. Obiter - In lieu of actual damages which was not proven or documented, temperate damages may be awarded in a murder case. (People vs. dela Tongga)

13

Disposition in accordance with the foregoing disquisition, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed subject to the following modifications1. In Criminal Case No. 8682 for frustrated murder, appellants shall only be liable to pay a. P370.50 for hospitalization expenses; b. P50,000.00, as moral damages, plus costs; and, 2. In Criminal Case No. 8683 for murder, in addition to the civil indemnity, moral damages and attorneys fees awarded by the trial court, appellants shall paya. P16,500.00, as funeral expenses; b. $600.27, as air ticket/freight of the cadaver, to be computed at the prevailing rate of exchange at the time of the promulgation of this decision; and, c. P200,000.00, as temperate damages, plus costs.

- We find the award of P15,000.00 as temperate damages reasonable. Moral damages cannot be awarded in the absence of any evidence to support its award

5. LIQUIDATED
Article 2226, CC. Liquidated damages are those agreed upon by the parties to a contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof. Article 2227, CC. Liquidated damages, whether intended as an indemnity or a penalty, shall be equitably reduced if they are iniquitous or unconscionable. Article 2228, CC. When the breach of the contract committed by the defendant is not the one contemplated by the parties in agreeing upon the liquidated damages, the law shall determine the measure of damages, and not the stipulation.

Page

PEOPLE V PLAZO 350 SCRA 433 QUISUMBING; January 29, 2001 FACTS - Leonor Fabula went out of her house to buy sugar from a nearby store. There she saw her son Romeo being beaten by Plazo for allegedly disclosing the whereabouts of his (Plazo) brother who was wanted for robbery in Manila. - She tried to intervene but this was to no avail. Eventually Romeo was able to escape. But he was chased down by Plazo and stabbed many times the last being a stab to the chest which led to his death. Leonora then told people not to move her son as she was going to ask for help from policemen. - on the other hand, Plazo stated that it was an act of self defense. He said that a he and his friend were lpaynig billiards when Romeo suddenly disrupted he game. He was drunk and when being pacified got angry and chased Plazo with a bolo. ThEy both fell and the bolo suddenly was imbedded in Romeos chest. - Court found Plazo guilty of murder and made to pay 50,000 for moral damages, 15,712 for actual damages, and 10,000 for moral damages ISSUES 1. WON Plazo is guilty of murder. 2. WON the 15,712 amount for actual damages is valid HELD 1. NO. - Plazo avers that the killing of Romeo Fabula was an act of self defense. He also questions the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the police and Leonora Fabula - Court held that inconsistencies were not substantial enough as to affect the validity of the testimony. Testimonies arent expected to be error-free. The inconsistencies pointed out by Plazo were not enough to disprove the testimonies of the witnesses. - his claim of self-defense was likewise unsupported. He wasnt able to fulfill all the elements necessary for self-defense. The number of stab wounds was indicated that the means employed was not necessary to repel the aggression. - However the circumstances qualifying the crime as murder were unsubstantiated. Premeditation and treachery were not proven as the elements for such were not present. therefore the crime committed was not murder but homicide. 2. NO - The trial court correctly awarded the amount of P50,000.00 as indemnity. However, the award of actual damages in the amount of P15,712.00 was based solely on the bare assertions of the mother of the victim. The Court can only grant such amount for expenses if they are supported by receipts. In the absence thereof, no actual damages can be awarded. However, in lieu of actual damages, temperate damages under Art. 2224 of the Civil Code may be recovered where it has been shown that the victims family suffered some pecuniary loss but the amount thereof cannot be proved with certainty

6. EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE
Article 2229, CC. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. Article 2230, CC. In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct from fines and shall be paid to the offended party. Article 2231, CC. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence. Article 2232, CC. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. Article 2233, CC. Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right; the court will decide whether or not they should be adjudicated. Article 2234, CC. While the amount of the exemplary damages need not be proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. In case liquidated damages have been agreed upon, although no proof of loss is necessary in order that such liquidated damages may be recovered, nevertheless, before the court may consider the question of granting exemplary in addition to the liquidated damages, the plaintiff must show that he would be entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages were it not for the stipulation for liquidated damages. Article 2235, CC. A stipulation whereby exemplary damages are renounced in advance shall be null and void.

14

PNB V CA G.R. No. 108630 ROMERO April 2, 1996 FACTS: Tan owned a parcel of land which was expropriated by the government. He filed a motion w/ the TC requesting that it issue an order for the payment of P32K as expropriation price. PNB was ordered to pay Tan the amount. PNB issued and delivered a managers check to Sonia Gonzaga who had a Special Power of Attorny supposedly executed by Tan in her favor. Gonzaga took the money for herself. Tan demanded payment which was refused by PNB, having already paid the amount to Tans agent. Tan file a motion with the court requiring PNB to pay. TC: ruled in favor of Tan and ordered PNB to pay the amount and exemplary damages. CA: affirmed, but deleted the award of exemplary damages. ISSUE: WON exemplary damages should be awarded to Tan. HELD: No. Exemplary damages may be awarded if a party acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. It cannot be recovered as a matter of right, but left to the discretion of the court. Although there was a breach of PNBs obligation to Tan, there is no basis for the award of exemplary damages.

Page

DEL ROSARIO V CA (METAL FORMING CORP.) 267 SCRA 158 NARVASA; January 29, 1997 NATURE: An appeal of a Decision of the Court of Appeals. FACTS - The Del Rosarios' complaint, filed on November 21, 1990, charged Metal Forming Corp. (MFC) with violation of Section 3 of Act No. 3740, "An Act to Penalize Fraudulent Advertising, Mislabeling or Misbranding of Any Product, Stocks, Bonds, etc. The complaint alleged that: 1) "in selling to the public roofing materials known 'Banawe' shingles,** (MFC) made representations on the durability of the product and sturdiness of its installation through massive advertisements in print media and television (and) brochures ;" 2) the representations -- particularly those characterizing the shingles as "STRUCTURALLY SAFE AND STRONG" and that the "BANAWE METAL TILE structure acts as a single unit against wind and storm pressure due to the strong hook action on its overlaps"-- "prompted the Del Rosarios to buy the 'Banawe' shingles and have them installed at their residence;" 3) "(b)arely two (2) months after completion of the installation, portions of the roof of the Del Rosarios were blown away by strong wind brought about by typhoon "Ruping." - The Office of the President found that: one cannot efface the fundamental fact that MFC acted in bad faith and/or with gross negligence in falling to deliver the necessary accessories for the proper installation of the structure and actually installed inferior roofing materials at Del Rosarios residence, in violation of the proper installation procedure expressly specified in the former's brochures and advertisements for installation, i.e., the metal tile attached to the roof panels should be two (2) self-drilling screws for one (1) metal cleat. However, instead of conforming with this procedure, MFC attached some of the metal cleats with this one (1)-inch ordinary nail each and others were fastened with only one (10) wood screw each. - MFC however declined to concede liability for the other damages claimed by the Del Rosario Spouses to have been caused to the interior of their home. This prompted the latter to commence a civil action against MFC. The spouses sought to recover from MFC damages resulting from the events just narrated, contending that aside from the destruction of the roof of their house, injury was also caused to its electrical wiring, ceiling, fixtures, walls, wall paper, wood parquet flooring and furniture. The Del Rosarios reckoned their actual damages at P1,008,003. They also prayed for an award to them of moral damages in the sum of P3,000,000; exemplary damages in the amount of P1,000,000; attorney's fees in the sum of P1,000,000. - Trial Court awarded P500K as moral damages and P300K as exemplary damages.

- CA reversed decision of the trial court, holding that there was no privity of contract. ISSUES 1. WON there is a privity of contract between the parties 2. WON upon the facts established by the evidence, MFC is answerable to the Del Rosarios for the damage caused to the latter's residence when its roof, made of shingles purchased from and installed by the former, was blown away by a typhoon (this case is under EXEMPLARY DAMAGES in the outline) HELD 1. YES, there is privity of contract bet the Del Rosarios and MFC. Reasoning - At all times and with regard to the acquisition and installation of the metal tiles or shingles, Puno was in truth acting as contractor of the Del Rosarios and on their instructions. Ascertainment of the definite identity of the person who actually ordered the shingles from MFC is utterly inconsequential -- it might just as well have been a construction foreman, a trusted domestic, or any friend or acquaintance of the Del Rosarios. - The tiles were delivered to the Del Rosarios and used in fabricating the roof of their home; it was the employees and workers of MFC who (a) delivered the shingles or metal tiles to the construction site of the Del Rosarios' home, and (b) undertook and completed the installation thereof. 2. YES , the Del Rosarios are entitled to moral and exemplary damages. Re: Actual damages - Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but must be duly proved and proved with reasonable degree of certainty. A court cannot rely on speculations, conjectures or guesswork as to the fact and amount of damages, but must depend upon competent proof that they have (been) suffered and on evidence of the actual amount thereof. - The report of Esteban Adjusters and Valuers, Inc. contains no statement whatever of the amount of the damage. Indeed, the testimony of Engr Abril, the representative of the Esteban Adjsters and Valuers, Inc., is that his firm had been retained only to determine the cause of the damage, not to estimate and assess it. Moral damages - Moral damages are awarded for indemnity or reparation not punishment or correction, that is, an award to entitle the injured party to obtain means (of) diversions and amusement that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone by reason of defendant's culpable action. - That MFC did in truth act with bad faith, in flagrant breach of its express warranties made to the general public and in wanton disregard of the rights of the Del Rosarios who relied on those warranties, is adequately demonstrated by the recorded proofs. The law explicitly authorizes the award of moral damages "in breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith. - Award of trial court of moral damages is reduced from P500K to P100K. Exemplary damages - Article 2229 of the Civil Code provides that such damages may be imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. While exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right, they need not be proved, although plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded Exemplary damages are imposed not to enrich one party or impoverish another but to serve as a deterrent against or as a negative incentive to curb socially deleterious actions. - Award of trial court of exemplary damages is reduced from P300K to P50K. Disposition Decision of the Regional Trial Court of November 18, 1991 is REINSTATED AND AFFIRMED, with the modification that the award of actual damages and attorney's fees is deleted, and the moral and exemplary damages awarded are reduced from P500,000.00 to P100,000.00, and from P300,000.00 to P50,000.00, respectively.

15