JARCO MARKETING v.

CA
GR No. 19792 December 21, 1999

FACTS:
Private respondents Conrado and Criselda Aguilar are parents to six-
year-old Zhieneth Aguilar, who died after being pinned down by a gift-
wrapping counter of Syvels Department Store owned by petitioner Jarco
Marketing Corporation.
At the time of the incident, Criselda was at the cashier signing her
credit card slip when she heard a loud thud behind her. Criselda turned to
see her daughter crying and screaming while being pinned by the
department stores counter. Zhieneth was immediately rushed to the hospital
but the next day, she lost her speech. She continuously degenerated and
eventually died 14 days thereafter.
Private respondents demanded from the petitioner reimbursement for
hospitalization, medical bills, wake and funeral expenses they incurred.
Petitioners refused to pay, instigating private respondents to file a complaint
for damages with the RTC.
The RTC ruled in favor of petitioner Jarco Marketing holding that the
proximate cause of the fall of the counter was Zhieneths clinging on to it
and that Criseldas negligence contributed to the accident.
The CA, however, ruled in favor of private respondents holding that
petitioners were negligent in maintaining a structurally dangerous, defective
and unstable counter. The CA further declared that Zhieneth, who was below
7 years old, was incapable of negligence or other tort; moreover, a child
below 9 years old cannot be held liable for an intentional wrong.

ISSUE: Whether Zhieneths death was accidental or attributable to

negligence.

RULING:
The death of Zhieneth was not accidental but attributable to the
negligence of the petitioners for maintaining a defective counter.
Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man,
guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of
human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a prudent and
reasonable man would not do. Negligence is the failure to observe, for the
protection of the interest of another person, that degree of care, precaution
and vigilance which the circumstance justly demands, whereby such other
person suffers injury.
The Supreme Court held that a person under 9 years old is conclusively
presumed to have acted without discernment and is exempted from criminal
liability. The rule, therefore, is that a child under 9 years old must be
conclusively presumed incapable of contributory negligence as a matter of
law.
 Criselda should also be absolved from any contributory negligence
because it was reasonable and usual for her to momentarily release Zhieneth
in order to sign her credit card slip.