Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
215
I. TORTS
NEGLIGENCE
TORT The omission of that degree of
An unlawful violation of private diligence which is required by the nature
right, not created by contract, and which of the obligation and corresponding to
gives rise to an action for damages. the circumstances of persons, time and
It is an act or omission producing an place. (Article 1173 Civil Code)
injury to another, without any previous
existing lawful relation of which the said Kinds of Negligence:
act or omission may be said to be a 1. Culpa Contractual (contractual
natural outgrowth or incident. negligence)
Governed by CC provisions on
NOTES: Obligations and Contracts, particularly
An unborn child is NOT entitled to Arts. 1170 to 1174 of the Civil Code.
damages. But the bereaved parents may
be entitled to damages, on damages 2. Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
inflicted directly upon them. (Geluz vs. Governed mainly by Art. 2176 of the
CA, 2 SCRA 802) Civil Code
Defendants in tort cases can either
be natural or artificial being. 3. Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence)
Corporations are civilly liable in the Governed by Art. 365 of the Revised
same manner as natural persons. Penal Code.
Any person who has been injured by
reason of a tortious conduct can sue the
tortfeasor.
The primary purpose of a tort action NOTES:
is to provide compensation to a person
who was injured by the tortious conduct The 3 kinds of negligence furnish
of the defendant. separate, distinct, and independent
Preventive remedy is available in bases of liability or causes of action.
some cases. A single act or omission may give rise
to two or more causes of action.
NOTES:
Negligence is a conduct - the
determination of the existence of
negligence is concerned with what the
defendant did or did not do
Culpa Aquiliana Crime
The state of mind of the actor is
Only involves private Affect the public
concern interest
not important; good faith or use of
The Civil Code by The Revised Penal sound judgment is immaterial. The
means of indem- Code punishes or existence of negligence in a given
nification merely corrects criminal act case is not determined by reference
repairs the damage to the personal judgment but by the
Includes all acts in Punished only if behavior of the actor in the situation
which any kind of there is a penal law before him. (Picart vs. Smith)
fault or negligence clearly covering them Negligence is a conduct that creates
intervenes
an undue risk of harm to others.
Liability of the
employer of the The determination of negligence is a
actor-employee is question of foresight on the part of the
Liability is direct and
primary in quasi- subsidiary in crimes actor FORESEABILITY.
delict Even if a particular injury was not
foreseeable, the risk is still foreseeable
QUASI-DELICT if possibility of injury is foreseeable.
Forseeability involves the question of
PROBABILITY, that is, the existence of
Whoever by act or omission causes
some real likelihood of some damage and
damage to another, there being fault or
the likelihood is of such appreciable
negligence is obliged to pay for the
weight reasonably to induce, action to
damage done. (Article 2176 Civil Code)
avoid it.
Calculation of Risk
Essential Requisites for a quasi- Interests are to be balanced only in
delictual action: the sense that the purposes of the actor,
the nature of his act and the harm that
1. Act or omission constituting fault or may result from action or inaction are
negligence; elements to be considered.
2. Damage caused by the said act or
omission; and Circumstances to consider in
3. Causal relation between the damage determining negligence: (PEST-GAP)
and the act or omission. 1. Time
2. Place
Tests of Negligence 3. Emergency
1. Did the defendant in doing the Emergency rule
alleged negligent act use the GENERAL RULE: An individual who
reasonable care and caution which suddenly finds himself in a situation
an ordinarily prudent person would of danger and is required to act
have used in the same situation? without much time to consider the
If not then he is guilty of best means that may be adopted to
negligence. avoid the impending danger is not
guilty of negligence if he fails to
they habitually drove their cars over the 3. The driver of a motor vehicle is
railroad crossings without slackening presumed negligent if at the time of the
speed. The SC rejected the argument by mishap, he was violating any traffic
ruling that: a practice which is dangerous regulation. (Article 2185 Civil Code)
to human life cannot ripen into custom 4. GENERAL RULE: Prima facie
which will protect anyone who follows it. presumption of negligence of the
defendant arises if death or injury
C. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTES results from his possession of dangerous
Compliance with a statute is not weapons or substance.
conclusive that there was no negligence. EXCEPTION: When such possession or
Example: A defendant can still be use is indispensable to his occupation or
held liable for negligence even if he can business. (Article 2188 Civil Code)
establish that he was driving below the 5. GENERAL RULE: Presumption of
speed limit. Compliance with the speed negligence of the common carrier arises
limit is not conclusive that he was not in case of loss, destruction or
negligently driving his car. deterioration of the goods, or in case of
death or injury of passengers.
EXCEPTION: Upon proof of exercise of
Gross Negligence - Negligence where extraordinary diligence.
there is want of even slight care and
diligence.
B. Res Ipsa Loquitur
1. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner 1. The accident was of a kind which
is presumed negligent if he was in the ordinarily does not occur in the
vehicle and he could have used due absence of someones negligence;
diligence to prevent the misfortune. 2. The instrumentality which caused
(Article 2184 Civil Code) the injury was under the exclusive
2. It is disputably presumed that a control and management of the
driver was negligent if he had been person charged with negligence; and
found guilty of reckless driving or 3. The injury suffered must not have
violating traffic regulations at least been due to any voluntary action or
twice for the next preceding two contribution on the part of the
months. (Article 2184 Civil Code) person injured; absence of
explanation by the defendant.
In both the Civil Code and the Employees are bound to exercise due
RPC, the owner may demand from care in the performance of their
the person benefited, indemnity for functions for the employers; absence
the damages. such due care, the employee may be
held liable.
Use of properties that injures another
An owner cannot use his property in 4. Banks
such a manner as to injure the rights of The business of banks is one affected
others. (Article 431 Civil Code). by public interest. Because of the
Hence the exercise of the right of nature of its functions, a bank is under
the owner may give rise to an action obligation to treat the accounts of its
based on quasi-delict if the owner depositors with meticulous care, always
negligently exercises such right to the having in mind the fiduciary nature of
prejudice of another. their relationship. (PBC vs. CA [1997])
held liable, if a bystander is hit as a caused the entire injury; they become
consequence. joint tort-feasors and are solidarily liable
for the resulting damage under Article
2194 of the Civil Code.
CAUSATION
Remote Cause
That cause which some independent
force merely took advantage of to Tests of Proximate Cause
accomplish something not the natural Two-part test
effect thereof. 1. Cause-in-fact Test
2. Policy Test
Nearest Cause NOTE: In determining the proximate
That cause which is the last link in cause of the injury, it is first necessary
the chain of events; the nearest in point to determine if the defendants
of time or relation. negligence was the cause-in-fact of the
Proximate cause is not necessarily damage to the plaintiff. (Cause-in-fact
the nearest cause but that which is the test)
procuring efficient and predominant If the defendants negligence
cause. was not the cause-in-fact, the
Concurrent Causes inquiry stops.
The actor is liable even if the active If it is, the inquiry shifts to the
and substantially simultaneous operation question of limit of the defendants
of the effects of a third persons liability. (Policy test)
innocent, tortious or criminal act is also CAUSE-IN-FACT TESTS:
a substantial factor in bringing about the 1. But-For Test
harm so long as the actors negligent The defendants conduct is the
conduct actively and continuously cause-in-fact if damage would not have
operate to bring about harm to another. resulted had there been no negligence
(Africa vs. Caltex) on the part of the defendant.
Where several causes producing the Conversely, defendants negligent
injury are concurrent and each is an conduct is not the cause in fact of the
efficient cause without which the injury plaintiffs damage if the accident could
would not have happened, the injury not have been avoided in the absence
may be attributed to all or any of the thereof.
causes and recovery may be had against
any or all of the responsible persons. 2. Substantial Factor test
Where the concurrent or successive The conduct is the cause-in-fact of
negligent acts or omissions of two or the damage if it was a substantial factor
more persons, although acting in producing the injuries.
independently, are in combination the In order to be a substantial factor in
direct and proximate cause of a single producing the harm, the causes set in
injury to a third person, and it is motion by the defendant must continue
impossible to determine what proportion until the moment of the damage or at
each contributed to the injury, either of least down the setting in motion of the
them is responsible for the whole injury, final active injurious force which
even though his act alone might not have
in the character and memory of the 2. In cases where the misconduct of the
deceased. student involves his status as a
Standard to be applied in student or affects the good name
determining if there was a violation of and reputation of the school.
the right is that of a person with
ordinary sensibilities. It is relative to b. Publication of Embarrassing
the customs of time and place and is Private Facts
determined by the norm of an ordinary Requisites:
person. 1. Publicity is given to any private
or purely personal information about
Four Types of Invasion of Privacy a person;
a. Intrusion upon plaintiffs 2. Without the latters consent; and
seclusion or solitude or into his 3. Regardless of whether or not
private affairs such publicity constitutes a criminal
It is not limited to cases where offense, like libel or defamation, the
the defendant physically trespassed into circumstance that the publication
anothers property. It includes cases was made with intent of gain or for
when the defendant invades ones commercial and business purposes
privacy by looking from outside invariably serves to aggravate the
(Example: peeping-tom). violation of the right.
GENERAL RULE: There is no invasion of
right to privacy when a journalist records PUBLIC FIGURE - A person, who
photographs or writes about something by his accomplishments, fame or mode
that occurs in public places. of living or by adopting a profession or
EXCEPTION: When the acts of the calling which gives the public a
journalist should be to such extent that legitimate interest in his doings, his
it constitutes harassment or overzealous affairs and his character.
shadowing.
The freedom of the press has never NOTE: Public figures, most especially
been construed to accord newsmen those holding responsible positions in
immunity from tort or crimes committed government enjoy a more limited right
during the course of the newsgathering. to privacy compared to ordinary
There is no intrusion when an individuals.
employer investigates an employee or The interest sought to be
when the school investigates its student. protected is the right to be free from
RA 4200 makes it illegal for any unwarranted publicity, from the
person not authorized by all the parties wrongful publicizing of the private
to any private communication to secretly affairs and activities of an individual
record such communication by means of which are outside the realm of
a tape recorder (Ramirez vs CA, Sept. legitimate public concern.
28, 1995) The publication of facts derived
Use of a telephone extension for from the records of official
purposes of overhearing a private proceedings which are not otherwise
conversation without authorization does declared by law as confidential,
not violate RA 4200. cannot be considered a tortious
NOTE: There are instances where the conduct.
school might be called upon to exercise
its power over its student for acts c. Publicity which places a person
committed outside the school premises in a false light in the public eye
and beyond school hours in the The interest to be protected in
following: this tort is the interest of the
1. In cases of violation of school individual in not being made to
policies or regulations occurring in appear before the public in an
connection with school sponsored objectionable false light or false
activity off-campus; or position.
EXAMPLE: Defendant was held liable The gist of the tort is an interference
for damages when he published an with one spouses mental attitude
unauthorized biography of a famous toward the other and the conjugal
baseball player exaggerating his kindness of marital relations
feats on the baseball field, resulting in some actual conduct
portraying him as a war hero. (Spahn which materially affects it.
vs. Messner) It extends to all cases of wrongful
If the publicity given to the interference in the family affairs of
plaintiff is defamatory, hence an others whereby one spouse is
action for libel is also warranted; the induced to leave the other spouse or
action for invasion of privacy will conduct himself or herself that the
afford an alternative remedy. comfort of married life is destroyed.
May be committed by the media If the interference is by the parents
by distorting a news report. of the spouse, malice must be
proven.
Tort of Putting Defamation
Another in False 3. Intriguing to Cause Alienation
Light
1. As to gravamen of claim 4. Vexation and Humiliation
The gravamen of The gravamen of Discrimination against a person on
claim is not the claim is the reputa- account of his physical defect, which
reputational harm tional harm causes emotional distress, may result
but rather the in liability on the part of the
embarrassment of a
person being made
offending party.
into some-thing he is Sexual Harassment falls under this
not category.
2. As to publication - a civil action separate and distinct from
The statement should Publication is the criminal action may be
be actually made in satisfied if a letter is commenced under RA 7877.
public sent to a third person - 2 types of Sexual harassment:
3. As to the defamatory character of the a) quid pro quo cases
statements b) hostile environment cases
Defendant may still What is published
be held liable even if lowers the esteem in
TORTS WITH INDEPENDENT CIVIL
the statements tells which the plaintiff is
something good held
ACTIONS
about the plaintiff 1. Violation of civil and political rights
(Article 32)
d. Commercial appropriation of Although the same normally involves
likeness intentional acts, it can also be
The unwarranted publication of a committed through negligence.
persons name or the unauthorized Public officer who is a defendant
use of his photograph or likeness for cannot escape liability under the
commercial purposes is an invasion doctrine of state immunity; the said
of privacy. doctrine applies only if acts involved
With respect to celebrities, are done by officers in the
however, the right of publicity is performance of their official duty
often treated as a separate right that within the ambit of their powers;
overlaps but is distinct from the right officers do not act within the ambit
of privacy. They treat their names of their powers if they violate the
and likeness as property and they constitutional rights of persons.
want to control and profit
therefrom. 2. Defamation, Fraud, and Physical
injuries (Article 33)
2. Interference with Family and other A. Defamation
relations Defamation is an invasion of the
interest in reputation and good
NOTES:
from liability because Art. 219 of b. The guest shall have followed the
the Family Code expressly directions which such innkeeper or his
provides that they are representative may have given with
subsidiarily liable. respect to the care and vigilance over
Art. 2180 makes teachers and the goods.
heads liable for acts of students
and apprentices whether the 2. Partnership
latter are minors or not. Partnership or every partner is liable
for torts committed by one of the
partners acting within the scope of the
firm business, though they do not
GENERAL RULE: The teacher-in-charge participate in, ratify, or have knowledge
is liable for the acts of his students. The of such torts.
school and administrators are not liable. Partners are liable as joint tort-
feasors.
EXCEPTION: It is only the head of the Vicarious liability is similar to the
school, not the teacher who is held liable common law rule on respondeat
where the injury is caused in a school of superior.
arts and trade. Liability is entirely imputed and the
The liability of partnership cannot obviously invoke
the teacher subsists whether the diligence in the selection and supervision
school is academic or non- of the partner.
academic.
3. Spouses
Liability is
a. absolute community of property
imposed only if the pupil is
already in the custody of the The absolute community
teacher or head. The student is property shall be for liabilities incurred
in the custody of the school by either spouses by reason of crime or
authorities as longs as he is quasi-delict in case of absence or
under the control and influence insufficiency of the exclusive property of
of the school and within its the debtor-spouse. (Article 94 Family
premises whether the semester Code)
had not yet begun or has already Payments shall be considered
ended. advances to be deducted from the share
The victim of negligence is of the debtor spouse upon liquidation of
likewise required to exercise due the community.
care in avoiding injury to b. conjugal partnership of gains
himself.
GENERAL RULE: Pecuniary indemni-ties
Other Persons Vicariously Liable: imposed upon the husband or wife are
1. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers not chargeable against the conjugal
partnership but against the separate
They are civilly liable for crimes properties of the wrongdoer.
committed in their establishments in
EXCEPTION: Conjugal partnership
cases of violations of statutes by them,
should be made liable:
in default of persons criminally liable.
1) When the profits have inured to the
(Article 102 Revised Penal Code)
benefit of the partnership, or
They are subsidiarily liable for the 2) If one of the spouses committed the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or tort while performing a business or if the
theft within their houses from guests act was supposed to benefit the
lodging therein, or for payment of the partnership.
value thereof, provided that: c. regime of separation of property
a. The innkeeper was notified in
advance of the deposit of such goods
Each spouse is responsible for
his/her separate obligation.
within the inn; and
C. STRICT LIABILITY
necessary that such damages have The rate of interest, as well as the
been foreseen or could have accrual thereof is imposed as
reasonably foreseen by the follows:
defendant. (Article 2202 Civil Code) 1. When the obligation is breached
The amount should be that which and it consist of payment of sum
would put plaintiff in the same of money, i.e., a loan or
position as he would have been if he forbearance of money:
had not sustained the wrong for a. The interest due should be
which he is now getting his that which may have been
compensation or reparation. stipulated in writing;
To recover damages, the amount of furthermore, the interest
loss must not only be capable of due shall itself earn legal
proof but must actually be proven. interest from the time it is
Uncertainty as to the precise amount judicially demanded.
is not necessarily fatal. b. In the absence of stipulation,
the rate of interest shall be
LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY: 12% per annum to be
Variables considered are: computed from default, i.e.,
1. life expectancy from judicial or extra-
2. net income/earnings judicial demand under and
subject to the provisions of
Formula: Article 1169 of the Civil
{2/3 x (80age of death)} x mo. Earnings x 12 Code.
2 2. When the obligation, not
NOTE: constituting a loan or
Life expectancy is computed as forbearance or money, is
follows: breached:
{ 2/3 x (80-age at death) } An interest on the amount of
Net earnings is the total of the damages to be awarded may
earnings less expenses necessary for be imposed at the discretion
the creation of such earnings and of the court at the rate of 6%
less living or other incidental per annum.
expenses. No interest shall be adjudged
on unliquidated claims or
Loss of profits damages, except when or
until demand can be
May be determined by considering established with reasonable
the average profit for the preceding
certainty.
years multiplied by the number of
Where the demand is
years during which the business was
established with reasonable
affected by the wrongful act or
certainty, the interest shall
breach.
begin to run from the time
the claim is made judicially
Attorneys fees
or extrajudicially.
They are actual damages. It is due to 3. When the judgment of the court
the plaintiff and not to the counsel. awarding the sum of money
Plaintiff must allege the basis of his becomes final and executory, the
claim for attorneys fees in the rate of legal interest shall be 12%
complaint; the basis should be one of per annum from such finality
the 11 cases specified in Article 2208 until its satisfaction.
of the Civil Code.
Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences
Interests A party cannot recover damages
Award of interest in the concept of flowing from consequences which the
actual and compensatory damages party could reasonably have avoided.
actual damages.
F. EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE
DAMAGES