California Clothing vs Quinones

Principles:
In the sphere of our law on human relations, the victim of a wrongful act or omission, whether done
willfully or negligently, is not left without any remedy or recourse to obtain relief for the damage or
injury he sustained. Incorporated into our civil law are not... only principles of equity but also
universal moral precepts which are designed to indicate certain norms that spring from the fountain
of good conscience and which are meant to serve as guides for human conduct. First of these
fundamental precepts is the principle commonly known... as "abuse of rights" under Article 19 of
the Civil Code.
The elements of abuse of rights are as follows: (1) there is a legal right or duty; (2) which is
exercised in bad faith; (3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.
Under the abuse of rights principle found in Article 19 of the Civil Code, a person must, in the
exercise of legal right or duty, act in good faith. He would be liable if he instead acted in bad faith,
with intent to prejudice another.[34]
Good faith refers... to the state of mind which is manifested by the acts of the individual concerned.
It consists of the intention to abstain from taking an unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of
another.[35]
Malice or bad faith, on the other hand, implies a conscious... and intentional design to do a
wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or moral obliquity.

Facts:

Respondent, Shirley G. Quiñones, a ticketing agent of Cebu Pacific Air, bought a pair of black
jeans worth P2,098.00 from Guess USA Boutique. While she was on her way to Mercury Drug Store, a
Guess employee approached her and said that she failed to pay for the black jeans. Nevertheless, she
presented an official receipt and suggested that they should talk about the matter in the Cebu Pacific
Office located within the mall. While they were in the office, the Guess employees allegedly humiliated
her in front of the clients of Cebu Pacific, repeatedly demanded payment and even searched the
respondent’s wallet to check how much money she had. Another argument ensued and after that,
respondent went home. The Guess employees submitted two letters to the Director of Cebu Pacific
narrating the incident but the said letters were not received.

Respondent filed a complaint for damages against the petitioners, California Clothing, Inc.,
Excelsis Villagonzalo, Imelda Hawayon and Michelle S. Ybañez, alleging that due to the incident, she
suffered physical anxiety, sleepless nights, mental anguish, fright, serious apprehension, besmirched
reputation, moral shock and humiliation. She demanded payment for moral, nominal, and exemplary
damages, as well as attorney’s fees and litigation expenses.

Petitioners stated that they approached the respondent to clarify whether or not payment was
made and that they approached and talked to the respondent in a gentle and polite manner. They sought
payment for moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees and litigation expenses as counterclaim.

The Regional Trial Court dismissed both the complaint and counterclaim stating that the
petitioners acted in good faith and the respondent was the one who put herself in that situation by inviting
the Guess employees to the Cebu Pacific Office to discuss about the issue of payment. However, the
Court of Appeals reversed and set aside the Regional Trial Court decision stating that there was
preponderance of evidence showing the petitioners acted in bad faith but, Hawayon and Villagonzalo
were absolved from liability due to good faith. Since petitioners acted in bad faith, respondent was entitled
to damages and attorney’s fees.

Issue:

Whether or not the acts of Guess employees constitute an abuse of right in such a way that will give a
cause of action to Shirley.

Held:

Yes. Under the abuse of rights principle found in Article 19 of the Civil Code, a person must, in the
exercise of legal right or duty, act in good faith. He would be liable if he instead acted in bad faith,
with intent to prejudice another.[34]

The elements of abuse of rights are as follows: (1) there is a legal right or duty; (2) which is
exercised in bad faith; (3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.
Good faith refers... to the state of mind which is manifested by the acts of the individual concerned.
It consists of the intention to abstain from taking an unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of
another.[35]
Malice or bad faith, on the other hand, implies a conscious... and intentional design to do a
wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or moral obliquity.
The principle of abuse of rights under Article 19 of the Civil Code is present in the case.
Respondent complained when petitioners embarrassed her and insisted that she did not pay for the black
jeans despite the issuance of an official receipt in her favor.

The court cited the case of Carpio vs. Valmonte in which the elements of abuse of rights were
enumerated. “The elements of abuse of rights are as follows:

(1) there is a legal right or duty;

(2) which is exercised in bad faith; (

3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.”

The elements stated are complete in the present case. First, petitioners continued to insist that
there was no payment made when respondent already presented the black jeans with the original receipt.
Second, they accused the respondent that not only did she fail to pay for the black jeans but she
intentionally stole it and quickly left the shop. Third, the letters sent to the respondent’s employer was not
only intended to ask for assistance in collection of the payment but also to ruin the respondent’s
reputation.
 The exercise of rights is subject to limitations. Thus, it must be in accordance with the purpose of
its establishment and not abused.