Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
215
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
A. NEGLIGENT TORTS
Involve voluntary acts or omissions
which result in injury to others without
intending to cause the same or
because the actor fails to exercise due
care in performing such acts or
omissions.
nature
of
the
obligation
and
corresponding to the circumstances of
persons, time and place. (Article 1173
Civil Code)
Kinds of Negligence:
1. Culpa Contractual (contractual
negligence)
Governed by CC provisions on
Obligations and Contracts, particularly
Arts. 1170 to 1174 of the Civil Code.
2. Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
Governed mainly by Art. 2176 of
the Civil Code
3.
Culpa
Criminal
(criminal
negligence)
Governed by Art. 365 of the
Revised Penal Code.
NOTES:
Culpa Contractual
The foundation of
the liability of the
defendant
is the contract
In breach of contract
committed through
the negligence of
employee,
the
employer
cannot
erase his primary and
direct liability by
invoking exercise of
diligence of a good
father of a family in
the selection and
supervision of the
employee.
Culpa Aquiliana
NEGLIGENCE
The omission of that degree of
diligence which is required by the
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Culpa Aquiliana
It is a separate
source of obligation
independent
of
contract
In quasi-delict the
presumptive
responsibility for the
negligence of his
servants can be
rebutted by proof of
the exercise of due
care in their selection
and supervision.
Crime
Affect the
interest
public
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and
Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
Liability
of
the
employer
of
the
actor-employee
is
subsidiary in crimes
QUASI-DELICT
Whoever by act or omission causes
damage to another, there being fault
or negligence is obliged to pay for the
damage done. (Article 2176 Civil Code)
Calculation of Risk
Interests are to be balanced only
in the sense that the purposes of the
actor, the nature of his act and the
harm that may result from action or
inaction
are
elements
to
be
considered.
Circumstances
to
consider
in
determining negligence: (PEST-GAP)
1. Time
2. Place
3. Emergency
Emergency rule
GENERAL RULE: An individual
who suddenly finds himself in a
situation of danger and is required
to act without much time to
consider the best means that may
be adopted to avoid the impending
danger is not guilty of negligence
if he fails to undertake what
subsequently and upon reflection
may appear to be a better
solution.
EXCEPTION:
When
the
emergency was brought by the
individuals
own
negligence.
(Valenzuela vs. CA 253 SCRA 303).
4. Gravity of Harm to be avoided
5. Alternative Course of Action
If the alternative presented to
the actor is too costly, the
harm that may result may be
still
be
considered
unforeseeable to a reasonable
man.
6. Social value or utility of activity
7. Person exposed to the risk
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and
Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
MEMORY AID
GOOD FATHER OF A FAMILY (pater
familias):
- this is the standard of conduct used
in the Philippines
- a man of ordinary intelligence and
prudence or an ordinary reasonable
prudent man
a reasonable man deemed to have
knowledge of the facts that a man
should be expected to know based on
ordinary human experience. (PNR vs
IAC, 217 SCRA 409)
- a prudent man who is expected to
know the basic laws of nature and
physics, e.g. gravity.
SPECIAL RULES
1. Children
The action of the child will not
necessarily be judged according to the
standard of an adult. But if the minor
is mature enough to understand and
appreciate
the
nature
and
consequence of his actions, he will be
considered negligent if he fails to
exercise due care and precaution in
the commission of such acts.
NOTES:
The law fixes no arbitrary age at
which a minor can be said to have the
necessary capacity to understand and
appreciate
the
nature
and
consequence of his acts. (Taylor vs.
Meralco, 16 Phil 8)
Applying the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code, Judge Sangco
takes the view that a child who is 9 or
below is conclusively presumed to be
incapable of negligence. In the other
hand, if the child is above 9 years but
below 15, there is a disputable
presumption of absence of negligence.
Absence of negligence does not
necessarily mean absence of liability.
Liability without fault: a child
under 9 years can still be subsidiarily
liable with his property (Art. 100, RPC)
Absence of negligence of the child
may not excuse the parents from their
vicarious liability under Art. 2180 NCC
or Art. 221 FC.
2. Physical Disability
Mere weakness of a person will not
be an excuse in negligence cases.
However if defect amounts to a
real disability the standard of conduct
is that of a reasonable person under
like disability.
IN
CIVIL LAW
MEMORY AID
c.
The fear that an insanity would
lead to false claims of insanity and
avoid liability.
7. Women
In determining the question of
contributory negligence in performing
such act, the age, sex, and condition
of the passengers are circumstances
necessarily affecting the safety of the
passenger, and should be considered.
(Cangco vs. Manila Railroad Co. GR
No.12191, October 14, 1918)
Although there is no unequivocal
statement of the rule, Valenzuela vs.
CA 253SCRA303 appears to require a
different standard of care for women
under the circumstances indicated
therein.
However, Dean Guido Calabresi
believes that there should be a
uniform standard between a men and
a women.
Other Factors to Consider in
Determining Negligence:
A. VIOLATION OF RULES AND
STATUTES
1. Statutes
GENERAL RULE:
Violation of a
statutory duty is NEGLIGENCE PER SE
(Cipriano vs. CA, 263SCRA711). When
the Legislature has spoken, the
standard of care required is no longer
what a reasonably prudent man would
do under the circumstances but what
the Legislature has commanded.
EXCEPTIONS:
a. When unusual conditions occur
and strict observance may
defeat the purpose of the rule
and may even lead to adverse
results.
b. When the statute expressly
provides that violation of a
statutory
duty
merely
establishes a presumption of
negligence.
NOTE: Rule as to proof of proximate
cause
GENERAL RULE: Plaintiff must
show that the violation of the
statute is the proximate or legal
cause of the injury or that it
substantially contributed thereto.
(Sanitary Steam Laundry, Inc. vs. CA
300SCRA20)
EXCEPTION: In cases where the
damage to the plaintiff is the
damage sought to be prevented by
the statute. In such cases, proof of
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and
Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
MEMORY AID
burden of proving such negligence.
(Taylor vs. MERALCO 16Phil8)
The quantum of proof required is
preponderance of evidence. (Rule 133
Revised Rules of Court)
EXCEPTIONS: Exceptional cases when
the rules or the law provides for cases
when negligence is presumed.
A. Presumptions of Negligence
B. Res Ipsa Loquitur
A. Presumptions of Negligence
1. In motor vehicle mishaps, the
owner is presumed negligent if he was
in the vehicle and he could have used
due
diligence
to
prevent
the
misfortune. (Article 2184 Civil Code)
2. It is disputably presumed that a
driver was negligent if he had been
found guilty of reckless driving or
violating traffic regulations at least
twice for the next preceding two
months. (Article 2184 Civil Code)
3. The driver of a motor vehicle is
presumed negligent if at the time of
the mishap, he was violating any
traffic regulation. (Article 2185 Civil
Code)
4. GENERAL RULE: Prima facie
presumption of negligence of the
defendant arises if death or injury
results from his possession of
dangerous weapons or substance.
EXCEPTION: When such possession or
use is indispensable to his occupation
or business. (Article 2188 Civil Code)
5. GENERAL RULE: Presumption of
negligence of the common carrier
arises in case of loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods, or in case
of death or injury of passengers.
EXCEPTION: Upon proof of exercise
of extraordinary diligence.
B. Res Ipsa Loquitur
The thing or transaction speaks
for itself.
It is a rule of evidence peculiar to
the law of negligence which recognizes
that prima facie negligence may be
established in the absence of direct
proof, and furnishes a substitute for
specific proof of negligence.
IN
CIVIL LAW
AFFIRMATIVE
DUTIES
AND
MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES:
1. Duty to Rescue
A. Duty to the rescuer
MEMORY AID
B. Duty to rescue
GENERAL RULE: There is no general
duty to rescue; a person is not liable
for quasi-delict even if he did not help
a person in distress.
EXCEPTIONS: A limited duty to
rescue is imposed in certain cases:
Abandonment of persons in danger and
abandonment of ones own victim is
considered,
under
certain
circumstances as a crime against
security (Article 275 RPC); and
No driver of a motor vehicle concerned
in a vehicular accident shall leave the
scene of the accident without aiding
the victim unless he is excused from
doing so. (Section 55 RA 4136 [Land
Transportation and traffic Code])
2.
Owners,
Proprietors
and
Possessors of Property
GENERAL RULE: The owner has no
duty to take reasonable care towards a
trespasser for his protection or even to
protect him from concealed danger.
NOTE: Damage to any person resulting
from the exercise of any rights of
ownership is damage without injury
(Damnum absque injuria)
EXCEPTIONS:
a. Visitors and tolerated possession
Owners of buildings or
premises owe duty of care to
visitors.
b. Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance
One who maintains on his
premises
dangerous
instrumentalities or appliances of
a character likely to attract
children in play, and who fails to
exercise ordinary care to prevent
children from playing therewith or
resorting thereto, is liable to a
child of tender years who is
injured thereby, even if the child
is technically a trespasser in the
premises.
NOTE: A swimming pool or pond
or reservoir of water is NOT
considered attractive nuisance.
(Hidalgo Enterprises vs. Baladan
91 Phil 488)
IN
CIVIL LAW
c. State of Necessity
MEMORY AID
B. Employees
Employees are bound to exercise
due care in the performance of
their functions for the employers;
absence such due care, the
employee may be held liable.
4. Banks
The business of banks is one
affected by public interest. Because
of the nature of its functions, a bank is
under obligation to treat the accounts
of its depositors with meticulous care,
always having in mind the fiduciary
nature of their relationship. (PBC vs.
CA [1997])
5. Common carriers
From the nature of their business
and for reasons of public policy, they
are bound to exercise extraordinary
diligence in the vigilance over the
goods and the safety of the
passengers.
The case against the common
carrier is for the enforcement of an
obligation arising from breach of
contract.
The same act which breached the
contract may give rise to an action
based on quasi delict. (Air France vs
Carrascoso, L21438, Sept. 28, 1996)
6. Doctors
A. STANDARD OF CARE
IN
CIVIL LAW
There is no employer-employee
relationship between the hospital and
a physician admitted in the said
hospitals medical staff as an active or
visiting consultant which would hold
the hospital liable solidarily liable for
the injury suffered by a patient under
Article 2180 of the Civil Code. (Ramos
vs. CA GR No 124354, April 11, 2002)
MEMORY AID
the rendition of medical services by
the consultant to the patient, while
the second concerns the provision by
the hospital of facilities and services
by its staff such as nurses and
laboratory personnel necessary for the
proper treatment of the patient.
(Ramos vs. CA GR No 124354, April 11,
2002)
7. Lawyers
An attorney is not bound to
exercise extraordinary diligence but
only a reasonable degree of care and
skill, having reference to the business
he undertakes to do.
DEFENSES IN NEGLIGENCE CASES
Kinds of defenses:
A. Complete completely bars
recovery
B. Partial mitigates liability
1. PLAINTIFFS
CONDUCT
AND
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
a. Plaintiffs own negligence as
the proximate cause
When
the
plaintiffs
own
negligence was the immediate
and proximate cause of his
injury, he
cannot
recover
damages. (Article 2179 Civil
Code)
b. Contributory negligence
Conduct on the part of the
injured party contributing as a
legal cause to the harm he has
suffered which falls below the
standard to which he is required
to conform for his own
protection. (Valenzuela vs. CA
253SCRA303)
If the plaintiffs negligence was
only contributory, the immediate
and proximate cause of the
injury being the defendants lack
of due care, the plaintiff may
recover damages but the courts
shall mitigate the damages to be
awarded (Article 2179 Civil
Code).
Doctrine
of
Comparative
Negligence
The
relative degree of negligence of
the parties is considered in
determining whether and to
what degree, either should be
responsible for his negligence
(apportionment of damages).
IN
CIVIL LAW
This is
the doctrine being applied in our
jurisdiction
wherein
the
contributory negligence of the
plaintiff does not completely bar
recovery but merely results in
mitigation of liability; it is a
partial defense.
The
court is free to determine the
extent of the mitigation of the
defendants liability depending
upon the circumstances.
2. IMPUTED
CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENCE
Negligence is imputed if the actor
is different from the person who is
being made liable.
The defendant will be subject to
mitigated liability even if the
plaintiff was not himself personally
negligent
but
because
the
negligence of another is imputed
to the plaintiff.
It is applicable if the negligence
was on the part of the person for
whom the plaintiff is responsible,
and especially, by negligence of an
associate in the transaction where
he was injured.
3. FORTUITOUS EVENTS
Essential requisites:
a. The cause of the unforeseen and
unexpected occurrence, or of
the failure of the
debtor to
comply with his obligation, must
be independent of the human
will;
b. It must be impossible to foresee
the event which constitutes the
caso fortuito, or if it can be
foreseen, it must be impossible
to avoid;
c. The occurrence must be such as
to render it impossible for the
debtor to fulfill his obligation in
a normal manner; and
d. The obligor must be free from
any
participation
in
the
aggravation
of
the
injury
resulting to the creditor.
NOTE: When an act of God concurs
with the negligence of defendant to
produce an injury, the defendant is
liable if the injury would not have
resulted but for his own negligent
conduct or omission. The whole
occurrence
is
humanized
and
removed from the rules applicable to
MEMORY AID
acts of God. (NAPOCOR vs. CA
[1993])
GENERAL RULE: It is a complete
defense and a person is not liable if
the cause of the damage is a
fortuitous event.
EXCEPTION: It is merely a partial
defense and the courts may mitigate
the damages if the loss would have
resulted in any event (Art. 2215(4)
Civil Code).
4. ASSUMPTION OF RISK
Volenti non fit injuria: One is not
legally injured if he has consented to
the act complained of or was willing
that it should occur.
It is a complete defense.
Elements:
a.
The plaintiff must know that the
risk is present;
b.
He must further understand its
nature; and that
c.
His choice to incur it is free and
voluntary.
KINDS:
a.
Express waiver of the right to
recover
IN
CIVIL LAW
EXAMPLES:
Persons
who
voluntarily
participate in dangerous activities
assume the risks which are usually
present in such activities.
EXAMPLE: A professional
athlete is deemed to assume the
risks of injury to their trade.
iv. Defendants negligence
b.
Implied Assumptions
i. Dangerous Conditions
MEMORY AID
encounter it, there is an implied
admission.
IN
CIVIL LAW
CAUSATION
Proximate Cause
That cause which in natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces
the injury, without which the result
would not have occurred.
Remote Cause
That
cause
which
some
independent
force
merely
took
advantage of to accomplish something
not the natural effect thereof.
6. PRESCRIPTION
An action based on quasi-delict
prescribes in four years from the date
of the accident. (Article 1146 Civil
Code)
Relations Back Doctrine
An act done at one time is
considered by fiction of law to
have
been
done
at
some
antecedent period. (Allied Banking
Corp vs. CA, 1989)
EXAMPLE: A doctor negligently
transfused blood to a patient that
was contaminated with HIV. If the
effect became apparent only after
five (5) years, the four (4) year
prescriptive
period
should
commence only when it was
discovered.
7. INVOLUNTARINESS
It is a complete defense in quasidelict cases and the defendant is
therefore not liable if force was
exerted on him. (Aquino, Torts and
Damages)
EXAMPLE: When the defendant was
forced to drive his vehicle by armed
men. He was, at pain of death, forced
to drive at a very fast clip because the
armed men were escaping from the
policemen. The defendant cannot be
held liable, if a bystander is hit as a
consequence.
Nearest Cause
That cause which is the last link in
the chain of events; the nearest in
point of time or relation.
Proximate cause is not necessarily
the nearest cause but that which is the
procuring efficient and predominant
cause.
Concurrent Causes
The actor is liable even if the
active and substantially simultaneous
operation of the effects of a third
persons innocent, tortious or criminal
act is also a substantial factor in
bringing about the harm so long as the
actors negligent conduct actively and
continuously operate to bring about
harm to another. (Africa vs. Caltex)
Where several causes producing
the injury are concurrent and each is
an efficient cause without which the
injury would not have happened, the
injury may be attributed to all or any
of the causes and recovery may be had
against any or all of the responsible
persons.
Where
the
concurrent
or
successive negligent acts or omissions
of two or more persons, although
acting
independently,
are
in
combination the direct and proximate
cause of a single injury to a third
person, and it is impossible to
determine what proportion each
contributed to the injury, either of
them is responsible for the whole
injury, even though his act alone might
not have caused the entire injury; they
become joint tort-feasors and are
solidarily liable for the resulting
damage under Article 2194 of the Civil
Code.
MEMORY AID
NOTE:
Primary cause remains the
proximate cause even if there is an
intervening cause which merely
cooperated with the primary cause and
which did not break the chain of
causation.
Tests of Proximate Cause
Two-part test
1. Cause-in-fact Test
2. Policy Test
NOTE: In determining the proximate
cause of the injury, it is first necessary
to determine if the defendants
negligence was the cause-in-fact of
the damage to the plaintiff. (Cause-infact test)
If
the
defendants negligence was not
the cause-in-fact, the inquiry
stops.
If it is, the inquiry shifts to the
question
of
limit
of
the
defendants liability. (Policy test)
CAUSE-IN-FACT TESTS:
1. But-For Test
The defendants conduct is the
cause-in-fact if damage would not
have resulted had there been no
negligence on the part of the
defendant.
Conversely, defendants
negligent conduct is not the cause in
fact of the plaintiffs damage if the
accident could not have been avoided
in the absence thereof.
2. Substantial Factor test
The conduct is the cause-in-fact of
the damage if it was a substantial
factor in producing the injuries.
In order to be a substantial factor
in producing the harm, the causes set
in motion by the defendant must
continue until the moment of the
damage or at least down the setting in
motion of the final active injurious
force which immediately produced or
preceded the damage.
NOTE: If the defendants conduct was
already determined to be the cause in
fact of the plaintiffs damage under
the but for test, it is necessarily the
cause in fact of the damage under the
substantial factor test.
3. NESS Test
The candidate condition may still
be termed as a cause where it is shown
to be a necessary element in just one
of several co-present causal set each
independently
effect.
IN
CIVIL LAW
sufficient
for
the
Multiple causation
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
NOTES:
A cause is not an intervening cause
if it was already in operation at the
time the negligent act is committed.
Foreseeable intervening causes
cannot be considered sufficient
intervening causes.
The intervention of unforeseen
and unexpected cause is not sufficient
to relieve the wrongdoer from
consequences of negligence if such
negligence directly and proximately
cooperates with the independent
cause in the resulting injury.
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
A. Plaintiffs negligence is the cause
Plaintiffs negligence is not
contributory if it is necessary and
sufficient to produce the result.
EXAMPLES:
1.
Only
the
plaintiff
was
negligent.
2.
Defendants negligence is not a
part of the causal set which is a part
of the causal chain.
3.
Plaintiffs negligence was preemptive in nature.
B. Compound Causes
Plaintiffs negligence may have
duplicative effect, that it, it is
sufficient to bring about the effect but
his negligence occurs simultaneously
with the defendant; the latters
negligence is equally sufficient but not
necessary to bring about the effect
because damage would still have
resulted due to the negligence of the
plaintiff.
Plaintiffs negligence is not merely
contributory because it is a concurring
proximate cause.
No recovery can be had. (Aquino,
Torts and Damages)
C. Part of the same causal set
Neither plaintiffs negligence nor
defendants negligence alone is
sufficient to cause the injury; the
effect would result only if both are
present
together
with
normal
background conditions.
Negligence of the plaintiff
cooperated with the negligence of the
defendant in order to bring about the
injury; determination of proximate
cause is only a matter of degree of
participation.
MEMORY AID
D. Defendants Negligence is the
Only cause
Defendants
negligence
was
sufficient AND necessary to bring
about the injury.
However, if plaintiffs negligence
increased or aggravated the resulting
damage or injury liability of the
defendant should also be mitigated
under contributory negligence rule or
under the doctrine of avoidable
consequences.
Doctrine of Last Clear Chance or
Discovered Peril
The negligence of the plaintiff
does not preclude a recovery for the
negligence of the defendant where it
appears that the defendant, by
exercising
reasonable
care
and
prudence,
might
have
avoided
injurious consequences to the plaintiff
notwithstanding
the
plaintiffs
negligence.
Alternative Views:
1. Prevailing view
Doctrine is applicable in this
jurisdiction.
Even if plaintiff was guilty of
antecedent negligence, the defendant
is still liable because he had the last
clear chance of avoiding the injury.
2. Minority View
The historical function of the
doctrine was to mitigate the harshness
of the common law rule of
contributory
negligence
which
prevented any recovery at all by the
plaintiff who was also negligent even if
his negligence was relatively minor as
compared with the wrongful act or
omission of the defendant.
The doctrine has no role in this
jurisdiction where common law
concept of contributory negligence has
itself been rejected in Article 2179 of
the Civil Code.
3. Third View
There can be no conflict between
the doctrine of last clear chance and
doctrine of comparative negligence if
the former is viewed as a rule or
phrase of proximate cause;
However, the doctrine of last clear
chance is no longer applicable if the
force created by the plaintiffs
negligence
continues
until
the
happening of the injurious event.
IN
CIVIL LAW
B. INTENTIONAL TORTS
Include conduct where the actor
desires to cause the consequences of
his act or believes that the
consequences are substantially certain
to result from it.
HUMAN RELATIONS
1. Principle
(ART.19)
of
Abuse
of
Rights
Elements:
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
Elements:
b. Seduction without
promise to marry
breach
of
Kinds:
c. Sexual assault
d. Desertion by a spouse
e. Trespass
Property
and
Deprivation
of
2 KINDS:
MEMORY AID
1)
Trespass
to
and/or
deprivation of real property
If
a
company
disconnects the electricity service
without prior notice as required by
the rules, the company commits a
tort under Article 21 NCC.
CIVIL LAW
Example:
IN
f.
1)
the
caused
through
negligence, or
abortion
was
the
physicians
2)
g. Illegal Dismissal
of
EXAMPLE:
False imputation of
misdeed to justify dismissal or any
similar manner of dismissal which is
done abusively.
MEMORY AID
h. Malicious Prosecution
i.
IN
CIVIL LAW
Public Humiliation
NOTES:
Elements:
1.
The fact of the prosecution
and the further fact that the
defendant was himself the prosecutor;
and that the action was finally
terminated with an acquittal;
2.
That in bringing the action,
the prosecutor acted without probable
cause;
3.
The prosecutor was actuated
or impelled by legal malice.
NOTES:
MEMORY AID
GENERAL RULE: Right to privacy is
purely personal in nature, hence:
1)
It can be invoked only by the
person whose privacy is claimed to
have been violated.
2)
It can be subject to waiver of
the person whose privacy is sought to
be intruded into.
3)
The right ceases upon the death
of the person.
EXCEPTION: A privilege may be given
to the surviving relatives of a deceased
person to protect his memory but the
privilege exist for the benefit of the
living, to protect their feelings and to
prevent the violation of their own
rights in the character and memory of
the deceased.
Standard to be
applied in determining if there was a
violation of the right is that of a
person with ordinary sensibilities. It
is relative to the customs of time and
place and is determined by the norm
of an ordinary person.
Four Types of Invasion of Privacy
a.
Intrusi
on upon plaintiffs seclusion or
solitude or into his private affairs
It is not limited to cases where
the defendant physically trespassed
into anothers property. It includes
cases when the defendant invades
ones privacy by looking from outside
(Example: peeping-tom).
GENERAL RULE: There is no invasion
of right to privacy when a journalist
records photographs or writes about
something that occurs in public places.
EXCEPTION: When the acts of the
journalist should be to such extent
that it constitutes harassment or
overzealous shadowing.
The freedom of the press has
never been construed to accord
newsmen immunity from tort or crimes
committed during the course of the
newsgathering.
There is no intrusion when an
employer investigates an employee or
when the school investigates its
student.
RA 4200 makes it illegal for
any person not authorized by all the
parties to any private communication
to secretly record such communication
by means of a tape recorder (Ramirez
vs CA, Sept. 28, 1995)
Use of a telephone extension
for purposes of overhearing a private
IN
CIVIL LAW
Requisites:
1. Publicity is given to any
private
or
purely
personal
information about a person;
2. Without the latters consent;
and
3. Regardless of whether or not
such
publicity
constitutes a
criminal offense, like libel or
defamation, the circumstance that
the publication was made with
intent of gain or for commercial
and business purposes invariably
serves to aggravate the violation
of the right.
PUBLIC FIGURE - A
person, who by his accomplishments,
fame or mode of living or by adopting
a profession or calling which gives the
public a legitimate interest in his
doings, his affairs and his character.
NOTE: Public figures, most especially
those holding responsible positions in
government enjoy a more limited right
to privacy compared to ordinary
individuals.
The publication of
facts derived from the records of
official proceedings which are not
otherwise declared by law as
confidential, cannot be considered
a tortious conduct.
MEMORY AID
c.
Public
ity which places a person in a
false light in the public eye
The interest to be protected in
this tort is the interest of the
individual in not being made to
appear before the public in an
objectionable false light or false
position.
EXAMPLE:
Defendant was held
liable for damages when he
published
an
unauthorized
biography of a famous baseball
player exaggerating his feats on
the baseball field, portraying him
as a war hero. (Spahn vs. Messner)
If the publicity given to the
plaintiff is defamatory, hence an
action for libel is also warranted;
the action for invasion of privacy
will afford an alternative remedy.
May be committed by the
media by distorting a news report.
Tort of Putting
Another in False
Light
Defamation
1. As to gravamen of claim
The gravamen of The gravamen of
claim is not the claim is the reputareputational
harm tional harm
but
rather
the
embarrassment of a
person being made
into some-thing he is
not
2. As to publication
The statement should Publication
is
be actually made in satisfied if a letter is
public
sent to a third person
3. As to the defamatory character of the
statements
Defendant may still What is published
be held liable even if lowers the esteem in
the statements tells which the plaintiff is
something
good held
about the plaintiff
d.
Comm
ercial appropriation of likeness
The unwarranted publication
of a persons name or the
unauthorized use of his photograph
or
likeness
for
commercial
purposes is an invasion of privacy.
With respect to celebrities,
however, the right of publicity is
often treated as a separate right
that overlaps but is distinct from
the right of privacy. They treat
their names and likeness as
IN
CIVIL LAW
MEMORY AID
A.
Defamation
Defamation is an invasion of
the interest in reputation and good
name, by communication to others
which tends to diminish the
esteem in which the plaintiff is
held, or to excite adverse feelings
or opinion against him.
Includes the crime of libel and
slander.
RPC considers the statement
defamatory if it is an imputation
of circumstance tending to cause
the dishonor, discredit or contempt
of natural or juridical person or to
blacken the memory of one who is
dead.
Requisites for one to be
liable
for
defamatory
imputations:
a. It must be defamatory
b. It must be malicious
c. It must be given publicity
d. The
victim
must
be
identifiable
NOTES:
Test
in
determining
the
defamatory
character
of
the
imputation: A charge is sufficient if
the words are calculated to induce
the hearers to suppose and
understand that the person/s against
whom they were uttered were guilty
of a certain offense, or are sufficient
to impeach their honesty, virtue, or
reputation, or to hold the person/s
up to public ridicule.
Dissemination to a number of
persons
is
not
required,
communication
to
a
single
individual is sufficient publication.
GENERAL
RULE:
Every
defamatory
imputation
is
presumed to be malicious, even if
it be true, if no good intention or
justifiable motive for making it is
shown.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. A private communication
made by any person to another
in the performance of any
legal, moral or social duty; and
2. A fair and true report,
made in good faith, without
any comments or remarks, of
any judicial, legislative or
other
official
proceedings
which are not of confidential
nature, or of any statement,
report, or speech delivered in
IN
CIVIL LAW
Half-truths
are likewise included; it is
actionable if the withholding of
that which is not stated makes
that which is stated absolutely
false.
Misrepresent
ation upon a mere matter of
opinion is not an actionable
deceit.
C.
Physical injuries
MEMORY AID
Battery an intentional
infliction of a harmful or offensive
bodily contact; bodily contact is
offensive if it offends a reasonable
persons sense of dignity.
Assault intentional conduct
by one person directed at another
which places the latter in
apprehension of immediate bodily
harm or offensive act.
Includes bodily injuries causing
death.
Physical
injuries
which
resulted because of negligence or
imprudence is not included in
Article 33; they are already
covered by Article 2176 of the Civil
Code.
3. Neglect of duty by police officers
(Article 34)
Subsidiary liability of cities and
municipalities, is imposed so that
they will exercise great care in
selecting conscientious and duly
qualified policemen and exercise
supervision over them in the
performance of their duties.
CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM DELICT
Every person criminally liable for a
felony is also civilly liable. (Article
100 RPC)
The reason is because a crime has
a dual character: as an offense
against the State and against the
private person injured by it.
Dual character of crimes applies to
cases governed by special laws.
Example: violation of the BP 22
results in criminal and civil
liability.
There is civil liability even if the
offense is a public offense, like in
bigamy.
Persons liable are the principal,
accomplice and accessories.
It includes restitution, reparation
of damages and indemnification of
consequential damages.
The rule on proximate cause in
quasi-delict cases is applicable to
cases involving civil liability arising
from delict. Art. 2202, NCC
Circumstances affecting Civil Liability
1. Justifying circumstances
IN
CIVIL LAW
2. Exempting Circumstances
Damages to be adjudicated
may either be decreased or
increased depending on the
presence
of
mitigating
or
aggravating circumstances.
Effect of Death
A. DEATH AFTER FINAL JUDGMENT:
extinguishes criminal liability of
the person liable but will not
extinguish the civil liability.
B. DEATH BEFORE FINAL JUDGMENT:
GENERAL RULE: The defendant is
relieved from both criminal and
civil liability arising from criminal
liability.
EXCEPTION: In case of libel and
physical injuries wherein the
plaintiff initially opted to claim
damages
in
the
criminal
proceeding can file another case
under Article 33 of the Civil Code.
Effect of Pardon
Pardon does not erase civil
liability.
While pardon removes the existence
of guilt so that in the eyes of the law
the offender is deemed innocent and
treated as though he never committed
the offence, it does not operate to
remove all the effects of the previous
conviction.
DEFENDANTS IN TORT CASES
Concurrent Negligence or Acts
1. Joint Tort-feasors
MEMORY AID
2. Motor vehicle mishaps
The owner is solidarily liable with
the driver, if the former, who was in
the vehicle, could have, by the use of
due
diligence,
prevented
the
misfortune. (Article 2184 Civil Code)
Solidary liability is imposed on the
owner not because of his imputed
liability but because his own omission
is a concurring proximate cause of the
injury.
Vicarious Liability or Doctrine of
Imputed Negligence
IN
CIVIL LAW
a)
minor children
b)
NOTES:
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and
Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
MEMORY AID
can escape liability by proving
that they observed all the
diligence of a good father of a
family to prevent damages.
(Art. 2180)
2. Guardians
For damage caused by
a. minors or incapacitated persons
b. under their authority
c. living in their company
3. Owners
and
managers
establishments
For damage caused by:
a) their employees
of
IN
CIVIL LAW
of
their
4. Employers
For damages cause by:
a) employees
helpers
and
household
NOTES:
6. Schools,
Teachers
and
Administrators
For damage caused by:
a) pupils
and
students
or
apprentices
b) in their custody
statutory basis:
if student is minor Art. 219,
FC
if student is no longer a minor
Art. 2180, Civil Code
NOTES:
academic institutions.
Liability attaches to
teacher-in-charge.
The
school itself is
solidarily liable with
teacher-in-charge.
the
now
the
Whenever
the school or
teacher is being made liable,
the
parents
and
those
exercising substitute parental
authority are not free from
liability because Art. 219 of
MEMORY AID
the Family Code expressly
provides
that
they
are
subsidiarily liable.
The
victim of negligence is likewise
required to exercise due care
in avoiding injury to himself.
Other Persons Vicariously Liable:
1. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers
They are civilly liable for crimes
committed in their establishments in
cases of violations of statutes by them,
in default of persons criminally liable.
(Article 102 Revised Penal Code)
They are subsidiarily liable for
the restitution of goods taken by
robbery or theft within their houses
from guests lodging therein, or for
payment of the value thereof,
provided that:
a. The innkeeper was notified in
advance of the deposit of such goods
within the inn; and
b. The guest shall have followed the
directions which such innkeeper or his
representative may have given with
respect to the care and vigilance over
the goods.
2. Partnership
IN
CIVIL LAW
The
absolute
community
property shall be for liabilities
incurred by either spouses by reason of
crime or quasi-delict in case of
absence or insufficiency of the
exclusive property of the debtorspouse. (Article 94 Family Code)
MEMORY AID
1. Animals
IN
CIVIL LAW
NOTES:
or
disregards
2. Falling objects
The head of a family that lives in a
building or a part thereof is
responsible for damages caused by
things thrown or falling from the same.
(Article 2193 Civil Code)
3. Liability of employers
MEMORY AID
its total or partial collapse, if it should
be due to lack of necessary repairs. .
2. Breach of implied warranties.
3. Consumer Act (R.A. 7394) any
Filipino or foreign manufacturer,
producer and importer, independently
of fault shall be liable for redress for
damages caused to consumers by
defects resulting from:
a. design;
b. manufacture;
c. construction;
d. assembly and erection;
e. formulas and handling and
making up; or
f. presentation or packing of
their products as well as for the
insufficient
or
inadequate
information on the use and hazards
thereof.
4. Even when an act or event causing
damage to anothers property was not
due to the fault or negligence of the
defendant, the latter shall be liable
for indemnity if through the act or
event he was benefited. (Art. 23 Civil
Code)
IN
CIVIL LAW
DEFENSES:
A. The
manufacturer,
builder,
producer, or importer shall not be
liable when it evidences:
1)
That it did not place
the product on the market
2)
That although it did
place the product on the market
such product had no defect
3)
That the consumer of
third party is solely at fault.
(Article 97 Consumer Act)
B. The supplier of the services shall
not be held liable when it is proven:
1) That there is no defect in the
service rendered
2) That the consumer of third
party is solely at fault. (Article 99
Consumer Act)
MEMORY AID
Defendant
cannot be held liable for more
than the amount for which the
contracting party who was induced
to break the contract can be held
liable.
B. Rule under Article 2201 and 2202
Civil Code
1)
If in bad faith: defendant is liable
for all natural and probable
consequences of his act or
omission, whether the same is
forseen or unforeseen.
2)
If in good faith: defandant is liable
only for consequences that can be
foreseen.
2. Interference
advantage
with
prospective
IN
CIVIL LAW
MEMORY AID
Damage
Damages
Legal
invasion of
a
legal
right
Loss, hurt
or
harm
which
results
from
the
injury
The recompense
or
compensation
awarded for
the damage
suffered
NOTES:
A complaint for damages is a
personal action. (Baritua vs. CA,
267 SCRA 331)
Proof of pecuniary loss is necessary
to successfully recover actual
damages from the defendant. No
proof of pecuniary loss is necessary
in case of moral, nominal,
temperate,
liquidated
or
exemplary damages.
The assessment of such damages,
except liquidated ones, is left to
the discretion of the court
according to the circumstances of
each case.
Kinds of damages (MANTLE)
1. Actual or Compensatory
2. Moral
3. Nominal
4. Temperate or moderate
5. Liquidated
6. Exemplary or corrective
A. ACTUAL
OR
COMPENSATORY
DAMAGES
Comprehends not only the value of
the loss suffered but also that of
IN
CIVIL LAW
NOTE:
Life expectancy is computed as
follows:
{ 2/3 x (80-age at death) }
Net earnings is the total of the
earnings less expenses necessary
for the creation of such earnings
and less living or other incidental
expenses.
Loss of profits
MEMORY AID
Attorneys fees
They are actual damages. It is due
to the plaintiff and not to the
counsel.
Plaintiff must allege the basis of
his claim for attorneys fees in the
complaint; the basis should be one
of the 11 cases specified in Article
2208 of the Civil Code.
Interests
Award of interest in the concept of
actual and compensatory damages
actual damages.
The rate of interest, as well as the
accrual thereof is imposed as
follows:
1. When
the
obligation
is
breached and it consist of
payment of sum of money,
i.e., a loan or forbearance of
money:
a. The interest due should be
that which may have been
stipulated
in
writing;
furthermore, the interest
due shall itself earn legal
interest from the time it is
judicially demanded.
b. In
the
absence
of
stipulation, the rate of
interest shall be 12% per
annum to be computed
from default, i.e., from
judicial or extra-judicial
demand under and subject
to the provisions of Article
1169 of the Civil Code.
2. When the obligation, not
constituting
a
loan
or
forbearance or money, is
breached:
An interest on the amount
of damages to be awarded
may be imposed at the
discretion of the court at
the rate of 6% per annum.
No interest shall be
adjudged on unliquidated
claims or damages, except
when or until demand can
be
established
with
reasonable certainty.
IN
CIVIL LAW
Contributory
Negligence
Plaintiffs act or
omission occurs
before or at the
time of the act or
omission of the
defendant
B. MORAL DAMAGES
Includes physical suffering, mental
anguish, fright, serious anxiety,
besmirched reputation, wounded
feelings, moral shock, social
humiliation, and similar injury.
No proof of pecuniary loss is
necessary.
GENERAL RULE: The plaintiff must
allege and prove:
1. The factual basis for moral
damages; and
2. Its causal relation to the
defendants act
EXCEPTION: Moral damages may be
awarded to the victim in criminal
proceedings without the need for
pleading of proof of the basis thereof.
Requisites for award of moral
damages:
1. There must be an injury whether
physical, mental or psychological,
clearly sustained by the claimant;
MEMORY AID
2. There must be a culpable act or
omission.;
3. Such act or omission is the
proximate cause of the injury;
4. The damages is predicated on the
cases cited in Art.2219.
NOTE: The award of moral damages
cannot be granted in favor of a
corporation
because,
being
an
artificial person, 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.
C. NOMINAL DAMAGES
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. (Article2221
Civil Code)
Small sums fixed by the court
without regard to the extent of
the harm done to the injured
party.
Law presumes damage although
actual or compensatory damages
are not proven.
They are damages in name only
and are allowed simply in
recognition of a technical injury
based on a violation of a legal
right.
Nominal damages cannot co-exist
with actual or compensatory
damages.
IN
CIVIL LAW
future
complications
directly
arising from the injury, while
certain to occur are difficult to
predict, temperate damages can
and should be awarded on top of
actual or compensatory damages;
in such cases there is no
incompatibility between actual
and temperate damages.
E. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
Those agreed upon by the parties
in a contract, to be paid in case of
breach thereof.
F. EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES
OR
CORRECTIVE
D.
TEMPERATE
OR MODERATE DAMAGES
These are damages, which are
more than nominal but less than
compensatory,
and
may
be
recovered when the court finds
that some pecuniary loss has been
suffered but its amount cannot be
proved with certainty. (Article
2224 Civil Code)
In cases where the resulting injury
might be continuing and possible
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and
Lease), John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)