Anda di halaman 1dari 14

DAMAGES ISSUE: whether private respondent can recover moral damages

arising from the cancellation of his credit card by petitioner


credit card corporation.
A. CONCEPT

HELD: We find the petition meritorious.


G.R. No. 120639 September 25, 1998

1. Whether petitioner had the right to suspend the credit


BPI EXPRESS CARD CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. COURT OF
card of the private respondent.
APPEALS and RICARDO J. MARASIGAN, respondents.

Under the terms and conditions of the credit card, signed by the
FACTS: The case arose from the dishonor of the credit card of the
private respondent, any card with outstanding balances after
plaintiff Atty. Ricardo J. Marasigan by Caf Adriatico, a business
thirty (30) days from original billing/statement shall
establishment accredited with the defendant-appellate BPI
automatically be suspended, thus:
Express Card Corporation (BECC for brevity), on December 8,
1989 when the plaintiff entertained some guests thereat.
PAYMENT OF CHARGES Any CARD with outstanding
balances unpaid after thirty (30) days from original
Plaintiff, who is a lawyer by profession, was a complimentary billing/statement date shall automatically be suspended and
member of BECC from February 1988 to February 1989 and was those with accounts unpaid after sixty (60) days from said
original billing/statement date shall automatically be
issued Credit Card No. 100-012-5534 with a credit limit of cancelled without prejudice to BECC's right to suspend or
P3,000.00 and with a monthly billing every 27th of the month. cancel any CARD any time and for whatever reason.
His membership was renewed for another year or until February
1990 and the credit limit was increased to P5,000.00. The The aforequoted provision of the card cannot be any clearer. By
plaintiffs oftentimes exceeded his credit limits but this was never his own admission private respondent made no payment within
taken against him by the defendant and even his mode of paying thirty days for his billing/statement dated 27 September 1989.
his monthly bills in check was tolerated. Their contractual Neither did he make payment for his original billing/statement
relations went on smoothly until his statement of account for dated 27 October 1989. Consequently as early as 28 October
October 1989 amounting to P8,987.84 was not paid in due time. 1989 thirty days from the non-payment of his billing dated 27
He was informed by his secretary that defendant was demanding September 1989, petitioner-corporation could automatically
immediate payment of his outstanding account, was requiring suspend his credit card.
him to issue a check for P15,000.00 which would include his
future bills, and was threatening to suspend his credit card.
2. Whether prior to the suspension of private respondent's
credit card on 28 November 1989 the parties entered into
Plaintiff issued Far East Bank and Trust Co. Check No. 494675 in an agreement whereby the card could still be used and
the amount of P15,000.00, postdated December 15, 1989 which would be duly honored by duly accredited establishments.
was received on November 23, 1989 by Tess Lorenzo, an
employee of the defendant, who in turn gave the said check to
Jeng Angeles, a co-employee who handles the account of the We agree with the findings of the respondent court, that there
plaintiff. Defendant served plaintiff a letter by ordinary mail was an arrangement between the parties, wherein the petitioner
informing him of the temporary suspension of the privileges of required the private respondent to issue a check worth
his credit card and the inclusion of his account number in their P15,000.00 as payment for the latter's billings. However we find
Caution List. Confident that he had settled his account with the that the private respondent was not able to comply with this
issuance of the postdated check, plaintiff invited some guests on obligation. Clearly the purpose of the arrangement between the
December 8, 1989 and entertained them at Caf Adriatico. When parties on November 22, 1989, was for the immediate payment of
he presented his credit card to Caf Adriatico for the bill the private respondent's outstanding account, in order that his
amounting to P735.32, said card was dishonored. One of his credit card would not be suspended. Thus, the issuance by the
guests, Mary Ellen Ringler, paid the bill by using her own credit private respondent of the postdated check was not effective
card a Unibankard. payment. It did not comply with his obligation under the
arrangement with Miss Lorenzo. Petitioner corporation was
therefore justified in suspending his credit card. Finally, we find
Plaintiff requested that he be sent the exact billing due him as of no legal and factual basis for private respondent's assertion that
December 15, 1989, to withhold the deposit of his postdated in canceling the credit card of the private respondent, petitioner
check. The defendant served its final demand to the plaintiff abused its right under the terms and conditions of the contract.
dated March 21, 1990 requiring him to pay in full his overdue
account, including stipulated fees and charges, within 5 days
from receipt thereof or face court action and also to replace the To find the existence of an abuse of right Article 19 the following
postdated check with cash within the same period or face elements must be present (1) There is a legal right or duty; (2)
criminal suit for violation of Bouncing Check Law. Thus, on May which is exercised in bad faith; (3) for the sole intent of
7, 1990 private respondent filed a complaint for damages against prejudicing or injuring another. In fact, the action of the
petitioner before the Regional Trial Court of Makati. petitioner belies the existence of bad faith. As early as 28 October
1989, petitioner could have suspended private respondent's card
outright. Instead, petitioner allowed private respondent to use
TRIAL COURT: ruled for private respondent, finding that herein his card for several weeks. Petitioner had even notified private
petitioner abused its right in contravention of Article 19 of the respondent of the impending suspension of his credit card and
Civil Code. Not satisfied with the Regional Trial Court's decision, made special accommodations for him for setting his outstanding
petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals. account. As such, petitioner cannot be said to have capriciously
and arbitrarily canceled the private respondent's credit card.
We do not dispute the findings of the lower court that private decide the issue of whether or not movant is entitled to said
respondent suffered damages as a result of the cancellation of his refund.
credit card. However, there is a material distinction between
damages and injury. Injury is the illegal invasion of a legal right; ISSUE: whether or not movant is entitled to said refund.
damage is the loss, hurt or harm which results from the injury;
and damages are the recompense or compensation awarded for HELD: The Government contends also that it would not be
the damage suffered. Thus, there can be damage without injury in equitable to make the Bureau of Customs liable for the refund
those instances in which the loss or harm was not the results of a demanded by movant, since the auction sale netted only P1.5 M,
violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the consequences must be whereas if the importation were allowed in 1961, the
borne by the injured person alone, the law affords no remedy for Government would have realized not less than P3 M. The
damages resulting from an act which does not amount to a legal argument is not persuasive, if only because the Court has
injury or wrong. These situations are often called damnum precisely found the importation to be illegal We cannot see how
absque injuria. any consideration of inequity can be predicated on the
hypothesis that something judicially declared illegal was legal
Quite the other way around, the stand of the Government is what
In other words, in order that the plaintiff may maintain an action
appears to be inequitable, for whereas, the amount of P1.5 M paid
for the injuries of which he complaints, he must establish that
by movant fully covers all the items enumerated in Section 2605,
such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant
including the amount paid by movant for private storage fees,
owed to the plaintiff a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff and
legal responsibility by the person causing it. The underlying basis still the Government refuses to refund movant, notwithstanding
that the provisions just cited expressly ordains that the said
for the award of tort damages is the premise that an individual
amount for storage fees is deductible from the accepted bid price.
was injured in contemplation of law. Thus, there must first be a
In effect, the Government is trying to unjustly enrich itself at the
breach of some duty and the imposition of liability for that breach
before damages may be awarded; and the breach of such duty expense of movant.
should be the proximate cause of the injury.
IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the decision of this Court in
the above-entitled case of September 12, 1974 is hereby modified
We therefore disagree with the ruling of the respondent court only in the sense that the administrative remedy therein
that the dishonor of the credit card of the private respondent by suggested for the refund of storage fees above discussed is
Caf Adriatico is attributable to petitioner for its willful or gross hereby declared unnecessary and the Collector of Customs
neglect to inform the private respondent of the suspension of his and/or the Commissioner of Customs are hereby ordered to
credit card, the unfortunate consequence of which brought social refund to movant Consolidated Tobacco Industries of the
humiliation and embarrassment to the private respondent. Philippines, Inc. CTIP the amount of Eight Hundred Twenty-
Three Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-Eight Pesos and Twenty
It was petitioner's failure to settle his obligation which caused Centavos (P823,768.20) paid by said movant to Luzon
the suspension of his credit card and subsequent dishonor at Caf Stevedoring Corporation on September 13, 1967, without
Adriatico. He cannot now pass the blame to the petitioner for not interest. In all other respects, the said decision stands.
notifying him of the suspension of his card. Nowhere is it stated
in the terms and conditions of the application that there is a need B. COMPENSATORY AND ACTUAL DAMAGES
of notice before suspension may be affected as private
respondent claims. This notwithstanding on November 28, 1989,
G.R. No. 61516 March 21, 1989
the day of the suspension of private respondent's card, petitioner
sent a letter by ordinary mail notifying private respondent that
his card had been temporarily suspended. FLORENTINA A. GUILATCO, petitioner, vs. CITY OF DAGUPAN,
and the HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents.
As it was private respondent's own negligence which was the
proximate cause of his embarrassing and humiliating experience, FACTS: Plaintiff, a Court Interpreter of Branch III, CFI--Dagupan
we find the award of damages by the respondent court clearly City, while she was about to board a motorized tricycle at a
unjustified. We take note of the fact that private respondent has sidewalk located at Perez Blvd. (a National Road, under the
not yet paid his outstanding account with petitioner. control and supervision of the City of Dagupan) accidentally fell
into a manhole located on said sidewalk, thereby causing her
right leg to be fractured. As a result thereof, she had to be
G.R. No. L-28782 September 12, 1974
hospitalized, operated on, confined, at first at the Pangasinan
Provincial Hospital, from July 25 to August 3, 1978 (or for a
AUYONG HIAN (HONG WHUA HANG), petitioner, vs. COURT OF period of 16 days). She also incurred hospitalization, medication
TAX APPEALS, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, respondents. and other expenses to the tune of P 8,053.65 or a total of P
10,000.00 in all, as other receipts were either lost or misplaced;
FACTS: Motion for reconsideration filed by respondent plaintiff suffered severe or excruciating pain not only on her right
Consolidated Tobacco Industries of the Philippines, Inc. (CTIP) of leg which was fractured but also on all parts of her body; the pain
the decision in this case promulgated on September 12,1974 has persisted even after her discharge from the Medical City
insofar only as said decision refrains from ruling on the matter of General Hospital on October 9, 1978, to the present.
the refund to said respondent of the storage charges alleged to
have been advanced by it in order to secure the release of the From the time of the mishap on July 25, 1978 up to the present,
tobacco sold to it at the public auction sale thereof after having plaintiff has not yet reported for duty as court interpreter. She
been seized and confiscated by the government, the same having earns at least P 720.00 a month consisting of her monthly salary
been illegally imported, as ruled in the very decision in this case, and other means of income, but since July 25, 1978 up to the
and directs that said matter be prosecuted administratively. It is present she has been deprived of said income as she has already
prayed that such directive be withdrawn and that the Court itself consumed her accrued leaves in the government service.
On appeal by the respondent City of Dagupan, the appellate This function of supervision over streets, public buildings, and
court reversed the lower court findings on the ground that no other public works pertaining to the City Engineer is coursed
evidence was presented by the plaintiff-appellee to prove that the through a Maintenance Foreman and a Maintenance Engineer.
City of Dagupan had "control or supervision" over Perez There is, therefore, no doubt that the City Engineer exercises
Boulevard. The city contends that Perez Boulevard, where the control or supervision over the public works in question. Hence,
fatal drainage hole is located, is a national road that is not under the liability of the city to the petitioner under article 2198 of the
the control or supervision of the City of Dagupan. Hence, no Civil Code is clear. Be all that as it may, the actual damages
liability should attach to the city. It submits that it is actually the awarded to the petitioner in the amount of P 10,000.00 should be
Ministry of Public Highways that has control or supervision reduced to the proven expenses of P 8,053.65 only. The trial
through the Highway Engineer which, by mere coincidence, is court should not have rounded off the amount. In determining
held concurrently by the same person who is also the City actual damages, the court cannot rely on "speculation, conjecture
Engineer of Dagupan. We agree with those of the trial court and or guess work" as to the amount. Without the actual proof of loss,
of the petitioner. Hence, we grant the petition. the award of actual damages becomes erroneous.

ISSUE: whether or not control or supervision over a national On the other hand, moral damages may be awarded even without
road by the City of Dagupan exists, in effect binding the city to proof of pecuniary loss, inasmuch as the determination of the
answer for damages in accordance with article 2189 of the Civil amount is discretionary on the court. Though incapable of
Code. pecuniary estimation, moral damages are in the nature of an
award to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered but
HELD: The liability of public corporations for damages arising which for some reason can not be proven. However, in awarding
from injuries suffered by pedestrians from the defective moral damages, the following should be taken into consideration:
condition of roads is expressed in the Civil Code as follows:
(1) First, the proximate cause of the injury must be the
claimee's acts.
Article 2189. Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be (2) Second, there must be compensatory or actual damages
liable for damages for the death of, or injuries suffered by, as satisfactory proof of the factual basis for damages.
any person by reason of the defective condition of roads, (3) Third, the award of moral damages must be predicated
streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works on any of the cases enumerated in the Civil Code.
under their control or supervision.

In the case at bar, the physical suffering and mental anguish


It is not even necessary for the defective road or street to belong suffered by the petitioner were proven. Witnesses from the
to the province, city or municipality for liability to attach. The petitioner's place of work testified to the degeneration in her
article only requires that either control or supervision is disposition-from being jovial to depressed. She refrained from
exercised over the defective road or street. In the case at bar, this attending social and civic activities. Nevertheless the award of
control or supervision is provided for in the charter of Dagupan moral damages at P 150,000.00 is excessive. Her handicap was
and is exercised through the City Engineer who has the following not permanent and disabled her only during her treatment which
duties: lasted for one year. Under preceding jurisprudence, the amount
of moral damages should be reduced to P 20,000.00. As for the
Sec. 22. The City Engineer--His powers, duties and award of exemplary damages, the trial court correctly pointed
compensation-There shall be a city engineer, who shall be in out the basis:
charge of the department of Engineering and Public Works.
He shall receive a salary of not exceeding three thousand
pesos per annum. He shall have the following duties: To serve as an example for the public good, it is high time
that the Court, through this case, should serve warning to
the city or cities concerned to be more conscious of their
(j) He shall have the care and custody of the public system duty and responsibility to their constituents, especially
of waterworks and sewers, and all sources of water supply, when they are engaged in construction work or when there
and shall control, maintain and regulate the use of the same, are manholes on their sidewalks or streets which are
in accordance with the ordinance relating thereto; shall uncovered, to immediately cover the same, in order to
inspect and regulate the use of all private systems for minimize or prevent accidents to the poor pedestrians.
supplying water to the city and its inhabitants, and all
private sewers, and their connection with the public sewer
system. We rule that the execution of the judgment of the trial court
pending appeal was premature. We do not find any good reason
The same charter of Dagupan also provides that the laying out, to justify the issuance of an order of execution even before the
construction and improvement of streets, avenues and alleys and expiration of the time to appeal. WHEREFORE, the petition is
sidewalks, and regulation of the use thereof, may be legislated by GRANTED.
the Municipal Board. Thus the charter clearly indicates that the
city indeed has supervision and control over the sidewalk where G.R. No. 104774-75 October 8, 1997
the open drainage hole is located.
ZACARIAS OARDE and PRESENTACION MOLAR, petitioners,
The express provision in the charter holding the city not liable for vs. COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES WILFREDO and LOURDES
damages or injuries sustained by persons or property due to the GUERRERO and SPOUSES ROGELIO and VILMA
failure of any city officer to enforce the provisions of the charter, MOLAR, respondents.
cannot be used to exempt the city, as in the case at bar. The
charter only lays down general rules regulating the liability of the
The Facts: In their brief, the plaintiff-appellant Oarde seeks
city. On the other hand article 2189 applies in particular to the
actual damages corresponding to the loss he suffered for failing
liability arising from "defective streets, public buildings and other
to get his share of the produce since October 1987 alleging
public works."
that his average share is 10 cavanes. Melicia Oarde testified that
since October 1987, they were not able to get their share of the
produce, averaging 10 cavanes of palay (after deducting the
landowner's share) for the third planting season (tsn, Dec. 9, moral and exemplary damages. Aside from the naked allegations
1988, p. 8). There is no other credible evidence of record of physical and emotional sufferings, petitioners failed to
pertinent to the claim of pecuniary loss of 70 cavanes based on substantiate their claims. Likewise, exemplary damages are
the alleged prevailing price of P184.00 to P197.00 per cavan of imposed not to enrich one party or impoverish another, but to
palay. Accordingly, the award for actual damages on the basis of serve as a deterrent against or as a negative incentive to socially
the unlawful dispossession by the vendee defendants Rogelio and deleterious actions. In this case, no harmful act can be attributed
Vilma Molar is calculated at 30 cavanes at the average price of to the private respondents which warrants the award of
P195.00 prevailing at that time (not disputed by appellee) or exemplary damages. WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby
P5,580.00. DENIED.

The trial court held that Petitioners Molar and Oarde were not G.R. No. 116110 May 15, 1996
lawful tenants of private respondents. Before us, Petitioner Molar
prays that she be declared as a lawful tenant, and Petitioner BALIWAG TRANSIT, INC., petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS,
Oarde asks that the damages awarded to him be increased from SPOUSES ANTONIO GARCIA & LETICIA GARCIA, A & J
P5,850.00 to P13,850.00. TRADING, AND JULIO RECONTIQUE, respondents.

ISSUES: 1. Is the award to Petitioner Oarde of P5,850 as his FACTS: On July 31, 1980, Leticia Garcia, and her five-year old son,
lawful share in the harvests of his tilled land from October 1987 Allan Garcia, boarded Baliwag Transit Bus No. 2036 bound for
to May 1991 correct? Cabanatuan City driven by Jaime Santiago. They took the seat
behind the driver. At about 7:30 in the evening, in Malimba,
2. Are petitioners entitled to moral and exemplary damages as Gapan, Nueva Ecija, the bus passengers saw a cargo truck parked
well as attorney's fees and litigation expenses? at the shoulder of the national highway. A kerosene lamp
appeared at the edge of the road obviously to serve as a warning
The Court's Ruling: The appeal has no merit. device. The truck driver, Julio Recontique, and his helper, Arturo
Escala, were then replacing a flat tire. The truck is owned by
respondent A & J Trading.
Issue: Share of Petitioner Oarde from Harvests
Bus driver Santiago was driving at an in ordinately fast speed and
Petitioner Oarde contends that Respondent Court erred in failed to notice the truck and the kerosene lamp at the edge of the
computing the award due him. He claims it should be P13,850.00, road. Santiago's passengers urged him to slow down but he paid
not P5,800.00, representing "the loss of 70 cavans of palay for the them no heed. Santiago even carried animated conversations
period October 1987 to May 1991 (filing of Brief) priced at with his co-employees while driving. When the danger of
P195.00 [each] or a total of P13,850.00, corresponding to seven collision became imminent, the bus passengers shouted
(7) harvest seasons for three and one-half years (3 1/2) counted "Babangga tayo!". Santiago stepped on the brake, but it was too
from October 1987 to May 1991." 29 late. His bus rammed into the stalled cargo truck. It caused the
instant death of Santiago and Escala, and injury to several others.
We are not convinced. A party is entitled to adequate Leticia and Allan Garcia were among the injured passengers.
compensation only for duly proved pecuniary loss actually
suffered by him or her. Such damages, to be recoverable, must Leticia suffered a fracture in her pelvis and right leg. They rushed
not only be capable of proof, but must actually be proved with a her to the provincial hospital in Cabanatuan City where she
reasonable degree of certainty. Damages cannot be presumed or treatment. After three days, she was transferred to the National
premised on conjecture or even logic. Orthopedic Hospital where she was confined for more than a
month. She underwent an operation for partial hip prosthesis.
Issue: Damages, Litigation Costs and Attorney's Fees Allan, on the other hand, broke a leg. He was also given
emergency treatment at the provincial hospital. Spouses Antonio
Petitioners plead that they were "dispossessed of their and Leticia Garcia sued Baliwag Transit, Inc., A & J Trading and
landholding" and "compelled to litigate and incur expenses in the Julio Recontique for damages in the Regional Trial Court of
prosecution of this suit," which entitle them to attorney's fees Bulacan.
under Article 2208 32 of the Civil Code. Further, they also pray for
an award of P6,000.00 as "actual expenses" and the additional Baliwag, A & J Trading and Recontique disclaimed responsibility
amount of P4,000.00 which they incurred in this appeal. for the mishap. Baliwag alleged that the accident was caused
Petitioners claim P10,000.00 as moral damages for their solely by the fault and negligence of A & J Trading and its driver,
"economic, physical and emotional sufferings" which were the Recontique. On the other hand, A & J Trading and Recontique
"inevitable and proximate result of their being ousted from the alleged that the accident was the result of the negligence and
land without any justifiable cause." They leave to the sound reckless driving of Santiago, bus driver of Baliwag.
discretion of this Court their claim for exemplary or corrective
damages. 33 After hearing, the trial court found all the defendants liable,
thus: In view thereof, the Court holds that both defendants
Respondent Court denied the claims for "moral and exemplary should be held liable; the defendant Baliwag Transit, Inc. for
damages and attorney's fees . . . for lack of legal and/or factual having failed to deliver the plaintiff and her son to their point of
basis." 34 We find no error in such ruling. The award of attorney's destination safely in violation of plaintiff's and defendant Baliwag
fees depends upon the circumstances of each case and lies within Transit's contractual relation. On appeal, the Court of Appeals
the discretion of the court. We scoured the records and, like the modified the trial court's Decision by absolving A & J Trading
Court of Appeals, found no legal, factual or equitable justification from liability.
for the award of attorney's fees. Likewise, we deny the claim for
ISSUES: 1. Did the Court of Appeals err in absolving A & J Trading Third, the award of moral damages is in accord with law. In a
from liability and holding Baliwag solely liable for the injuries breach of contract of carriage, moral damages are recoverable if
suffered by Leticia and Allan Garcia in the accident? the carrier, through its agent, acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
The evidence show the gross negligence of the driver of Baliwag
2. Is the amount of damages awarded by the Court of Appeals to bus which amounted to bad faith. Without doubt, Leticia and
the Garcia spouses correct? Allan experienced physical suffering, mental anguish and serious
anxiety by reason of the accident. Leticia underwent an operation
to replace her broken hip bone with a metal plate. She was
HELD: We affirm the factual findings of the Court of Appeals. As a confined at the National Orthopedic Hospital for 45 days. The
common carrier, Baliwag breached its contract of carriage when young Allan was also confined in the hospital for his foot injury.
it failed to deliver its passengers, Leticia and Allan Garcia to their Contrary to the contention of Baliwag, the decision of the trial
destination safe and sound. In a contract of carriage, it is court as affirmed by, the Court of Appeals awarded moral
presumed that the common carrier was at fault or was negligent damages to Antonio and Leticia Garcia not in their capacity as
when a passenger dies or is injured. This statutory presumption parents of Allan. Leticia was given moral damages as an injured
may only be overcome by evidence that the carrier exercised party. Allan was also granted moral damages as an injured party
extraordinary diligence as prescribed in Articles 1733 and 1755 but because of his minority, the award in his favor has to be given
of the Civil Code. to his father who represented him in the suit.

The records are bereft of any proof to show that Baliwag Finally, we find the award of attorney's fees justified. The
exercised extra ordinary diligence. On the contrary, the evidence complaint for damages was instituted by the Garcia spouses on
demonstrates its driver's recklessness. Leticia Garcia testified December 15, 1982, following the unjustified refusal of Baliwag
that the bus was running at a very high speed despite the drizzle to settle their claim. The Decision was promulgated by the trial
and the darkness of the highway. The passengers pleaded for its court only on January 29, 1991 or about nine years later.
driver to slow down, but their plea was ignored. 13 Leticia also Numerous pleadings were filed before the trial court, the
revealed that the driver was smelling of liquor. 14 She could smell appellate court and to this Court. Given the complexity of the case
him as she was seated right behind the driver. Another and the amount of damages involved, the award of attorney's fee
passenger, Felix Cruz testified that immediately before the for P10,000.00 is just and reasonable.
collision, the bus driver was conversing with a co-employee. 15 All
these prove the bus driver's wanton disregard for the physical
safety of his passengers, which makes Baliwag as a common COMPONENT ELEMENTS
carrier liable for damages under Article 1759 of the Civil Code:
[G.R. No. 111584. September 17, 2001] PRODUCERS BANK OF
Art. 1759. Common carriers are liable for the death of or THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and
injuries to passengers through the negligence or willfull acts SPOUSES SALVADOR Y. CHUA and EMILIA U.
of the former's employees, although such employees may CHUA, respondents
have acted beyond the scope of their authority or in
violation of the orders of the common carriers. This liability
of the common carriers do not cease upon proof that they FACTS: Sometime in April, 1982, respondent Salvador Chua was
exercised all the diligence of a good father of a family in the
selection or supervision of their employees. offered by Mr. Jimmy Rojas, manager of petitioner bank, to
transfer his account from Pacific Banking Corporation to herein
petitioner Producers Bank of the Philippines. In view of Rojas'
Baliwag cannot evade its liability by insisting that the accident
assurances of longer loan terms and lower rates of interest,
was caused solely by the negligence of A & J Trading and Julio
respondent spouses opened and maintained substantial savings
Recontique. Baliwag's argument that the kerosene lamp or torch
and current deposits with the Bacolod branch of petitioner bank.
does not substantially comply with the law is untenable. Indeed,
Col. dela Cruz himself admitted that a kerosene lamp is an Likewise, private respondents obtained various loans from
acceptable substitute for the reflectorized plates. No negligence, petitioner bank, one of which was a loan for P2,000,000.00 which
therefore, may be imputed to A & J Trading and its driver, was secured by a real estate mortgage and payable within a
Recontique. period of three (3) years or from 1982 to 1985. On January 20,
1984, private respondents deposited with petitioner bank the
We now review the amount of damages awarded to the Garcia total sum of P960,000.00, which was duly entered in private
spouses. First, the propriety of the amount awarded as respondents' savings account passbook. However, petitioner
hospitalization and medical fees. The award of P25,000.00 is not bank failed to credit this deposit in private respondents' savings
supported by the evidence on record. The Garcias presented account due to the fact that its Branch Manager, Sixto Castillo,
receipts but their total amounted only to P5,017.74. To be sure, absconded with the money of the bank's depositors. Also,
Leticia testified as to the extra amount spent for her medical petitioner bank dishonored the checks drawn out by private
needs but without more reliable evidence, her lone testimony respondents in favor of their various creditors on the ground of
cannot justify the award of P25,000.00. To prove actual damages, insufficient funds, despite the fact that at that time, the balance of
the best evidence available to the injured party must be private respondents' deposit was in the amount of
presented. Thus, we reduce the actual damages for medical and P1,051,051.19.
hospitalization expenses to P5,017.74. Second, we find as
These events prompted private respondents to request for
reasonable the award of P300,000.00 representing Leticia's lost
copies of their ledgers covering their savings and current
earnings. Before the accident, Leticia was engaged in embroidery,
accounts, but petitioner bank refused. Due to petitioner bank's
earning P5,000.00 per month. Her injuries forced her to stop
refusal to furnish private respondents copies of their ledgers,
working. Considering the nature and extent of her injuries and
private respondents instituted on January 30, 1984 an action for
the length of time it would take her to recover, we find it proper
damages against petitioner bank. On the other hand, petitioner
that Baliwag should compensate her lost income for five (5)
bank filed with the City Sheriff of Bacolod a petition for
years.
extrajudicial foreclosure of the real estate mortgage, private
respondents filed a complaint for injunction and damages Of course, a plaintiff need not prove the actual extent of
docketed as Civil Case No. 3276, alleging that the petition for exemplary damages, for its determination is addressed to the
extrajudicial foreclosure was without basis and was instituted sound discretion of the court upon proof of the plaintiff's
maliciously in order to harass private respondents. On October entitlement to moral, temperate, or compensatory damages
31, 1991, upon appeal by petitioner bank, the Court of Appeals (Article 2234, Civil Code). In the instant case, exemplary damages
modified the decision of the trial court. Petitioner moved for a in the amount of P150,000.00 are proper.
partial reconsideration of the above decision but the same was
denied. Anent the award of actual damages, the Court of Appeals
granted private respondents the amount of P18,000.00 per
HELD: Petitioner contends that it has the right to foreclose the month representing private respondents' unrealized profits from
real estate mortgage executed by private respondents in its favor his gasoline station business, to commence from October 16,
as the loan under the real estate mortgage contract had become 1984. Under Articles 2199 and 2200 of the Civil Code, actual or
due and demandable. This argument is not well-taken. compensatory damages are those awarded in satisfaction of, or in
Foreclosure is but a necessary consequence of non-payment of a recompense for, loss or injury sustained. There are two kinds of
mortgage indebtedness. As a rule, the mortgage can be foreclosed actual or compensatory damages: one is the loss of what a person
only when the debt remains unpaid at the time it is due. As found already possesses, and the other is the failure to receive as a
by the trial court and the Court of Appeals, and as borne by the benefit that which would have pertained to him. Damages
evidence on record, private respondents were constantly paying consisting of unrealized profits, frequently referred as "ganacias
their loan obligations with petitioner bank. In fact the amount of frustradas" or "lucrum cessans," are not to be granted on the basis
P960,000.00 was properly deposited with petitioner bank as of mere speculation, conjecture, or surmise, but rather by
evidenced by the corresponding deposit slip and the entry made reference to some reasonably definite standard such as market
in private respondents' savings account passbook. It is, therefore, value, established experienced, or direct inference from known
not the fault of private respondents that their payment circumstances.
amounting to P960,000.00 was not credited to their account.
In the case at bar, actual damages in the form of unrealized
Clearly, private respondents have not yet defaulted on the profits were awarded on the basis of the sole testimony of private
payment of their loans. Indisputably, the application for respondent Salvador Chua. However, other than the testimony of
foreclosure of the mortgage on October 15, 1984 was premature Salvador Chua, private respondents failed to present
because by then, private respondents' loan was not yet due and documentary evidence which is necessary to substantiate their
demandable. Likewise, both the Court of Appeals and the trial claim for actual or compensatory damages. When the existence of
court found that private respondents are entitled to moral and a loss is established, absolute certainty as to its amount is not
exemplary damages. We agree. required. The Court finds the evidence of private respondents
insufficient to be considered within the purview of "best
Moral and exemplary damages may be awarded without evidence." The bare assertion of private respondent Salvador
proof of pecuniary loss. In awarding such damages, the court Chua that he lost an average of P18,000.00 per month is
shall take into account the circumstances obtaining in the case inadequate if not speculative and should be admitted with
and assess damages according to its discretion. The dishonor of extreme caution especially because it is not supported by
private respondents' checks and the foreclosure initiated by independent evidence. In the absence of specific facts proving
petitioner adversely affected the credit standing as well as the damages, that actual damage has been sustained. The Court
business dealings of private respondents as their suppliers cannot rely on speculations as to the fact and amount of
discontinued credit lines resulting in the collapse of their damages. It must depend on actual proof of the damages alleged
businesses. to have been suffered.
The damage to private respondents' reputation and social Finally, the award of attorney's fees as part of damages is
standing entitles them to moral damages. Article 2217, in relation deemed just and equitable under the circumstances. Attorney's
to Article 2220, of the Civil Code explicitly provides that "moral fees may be awarded when a party is compelled to litigate or to
damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, incur expenses to protect his interest by reason of an unjustified
serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral act of the other party. In this case, petitioner bank's act of not
shock, social humiliation, and similar injury." Obviously, crediting private respondents' deposit of P960,000.00, as well as
petitioner bank's wrongful act caused serious anxiety, the premature filing of the extrajudicial foreclosure, have
embarrassment, and humiliation to private respondents for compelled private respondents to institute an action for
which they are entitled to recover moral damages in the amount injunction and damages primarily in order to protect their rights
of P300,000.00 which we deem to be reasonable. The award of and interests. The award of attorney's fees is also justified under
exemplary damages is in order in view of the malicious and Article 2208 of the Civil Code which provides:
unwarranted application for extrajudicial foreclosure by
petitioner which was obviously done to harass, embarrass,
ART. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees and expenses of litigation,
annoy, or ridicule private respondents. Petitioner bank's failure other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except:
to credit the deposit in the account of private respondents
constituted gross negligence in the performance of its contractual (1) when exemplary damages are awarded;
obligation which amounts to evident bad faith. Verily, all these
acts of petitioner were accompanied by bad faith and done in
(2) when the defendant's act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with
wanton, fraudulent and malevolent manner warranting the third persons or to incur expenses to protect his interest;
award of exemplary damages in favor of private respondents, in
accordance with Article 2232 of the Civil Code which provides:

ART. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary
damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive,
or malevolent manner.
G.R. No. 97412 July 12, 1994 The cases can perhaps be classified into two groups according to
the similarity of the issues involved and the corresponding
EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF rulings rendered by the court. In the "first group", the basic issue
APPEALS AND MERCANTILE INSURANCE COMPANY, focuses on the application of either the 6% (under the Civil Code)
INC., respondents. or 12% (under the Central Bank Circular) interest per annum. It
is easily discernible in these cases that there has been a
consistent holding that the Central Bank Circular imposing the
FACTS: On December 4, 1981, two fiber drums of riboflavin were 12% interest per annum applies only to loans or forbearance16 of
shipped from Yokohama, Japan for delivery vessel "SS EASTERN money, goods or credits, as well as to judgments involving such
COMET" owned by defendant Eastern Shipping Lines. The loan or forbearance of money, goods or credits, and that the 6%
shipment was insured under plaintiff's Marine Insurance Policy. interest under the Civil Code governs when the transaction
Upon arrival of the shipment in Manila on December 12, 1981, it involves the payment of indemnities in the concept of damage
was discharged unto the custody of defendant Metro Port Service, arising from the breach or a delay in the performance of
Inc. The latter excepted to one drum, said to be in bad order, obligations in general. Observe, too, that in these cases, a
which damage was unknown to plaintiff. Plaintiff contended that common time frame in the computation of the 6% interest per
due to the losses/damage sustained by said drum, the consignee annum has been applied, i.e., from the time the complaint is filed
suffered losses totaling P19,032.95, due to the fault and until the adjudged amount is fully paid.
negligence of defendants. Claims were presented against
defendants who failed and refused to pay the same. As a
consequence of the losses sustained, plaintiff was compelled to The "second group", did not alter the pronounced rule on the
pay the consignee P19,032.95 under the aforestated marine application of the 6% or 12% interest per annum,17depending on
insurance policy, so that it became subrogated to all the rights of whether or not the amount involved is a loan or forbearance, on
action of said consignee against defendants. the one hand, or one of indemnity for damage, on the other hand.
Unlike, however, the "first group" which remained consistent in
holding that the running of the legal interest should be from the
As to the first issue, there can be no doubt that the shipment time of the filing of the complaint until fully paid, the "second
sustained losses/damages. The two drums were shipped in good group" varied on the commencement of the running of the legal
order and condition, as clearly shown by the Bill of Lading and interest.
Commercial Invoice which do not indicate any damages drum
that was shipped. But when on December 12, 1981 the shipment
was delivered to defendant Metro Port Service, Inc., it excepted to I. When an obligation, regardless of its source, i.e., law, contracts,
one drum in bad order. Correspondingly, as to the second issue, it quasi-contracts, delicts or quasi-delicts is breached, the
follows that the losses/damages were sustained while in the contravenor can be held liable for damages. The provisions under
respective and/or successive custody and possession of Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining
defendants carrier (Eastern), arrastre operator (Metro Port) and the measure of recoverable damages.
broker (Allied Brokerage).
II. With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept
ISSUES: (a) whether or not a claim for damage sustained on a of actual and compensatory damages, the rate of interest, as well
shipment of goods can be a solidary, or joint and several, liability as the accrual thereof, is imposed, as follows:
of the common carrier, the arrastre operator and the customs
broker; (b) whether the payment of legal interest on an award for 1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment
loss or damage is to be computed from the time the complaint is of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the
filed or from the date the decision appealed from is rendered; interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in
and (c) whether the applicable rate of interest, referred to above, writing. Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal
is twelve percent (12%) or six percent (6%). interest from the time it is judicially demanded.22 In the absence
of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 12% per annum to be
HELD: The petition is, in part, granted. The legal relationship computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extrajudicial demand
between the consignee and the arrastre operator is akin to that of under and subject to the provisions of Article 116923 of the Civil
a depositor and warehouseman. The relationship between the Code.
consignee and the common carrier is similar to that of the
consignee and the arrastre operator. Since it is the duty of the 2. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of
ARRASTRE to take good care of the goods that are in its custody money, is breached, an interest on the amount of damages
and to deliver them in good condition to the consignee, such awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate
responsibility also devolves upon the CARRIER. Both the of 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged on
ARRASTRE and the CARRIER are therefore charged with the unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand
obligation to deliver the goods in good condition to the can be established with reasonable certainty. Accordingly, where
consignee. the demand is established with reasonable certainty, the interest
shall begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or
We do not, of course, imply by the above pronouncement that the extrajudicially (Art. 1169, Civil Code) but when such certainty
arrastre operator and the customs broker are themselves always cannot be so reasonably established at the time the demand is
and necessarily liable solidarily with the carrier, or vice-versa. made, the interest shall begin to run only from the date the
judgment of the court is made (at which time the quantification of
damages may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained).
Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the
debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the The actual base for the computation of legal interest shall, in any
contrary, shall be the payment of interest agreed upon, and in the absence of case, be on the amount finally adjudged.
stipulation, the legal interest which is six percent per annum.

3. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money


becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest, whether
the case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, above, shall be the amount of P70,000 as indemnification for actual damages in
12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction, this the form of lost profits and P2 Million for moral and other
interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a damages. Failing to obtain from the BANK a favorable action on
forbearance of credit. WHEREFORE, the petition is partly his demand for indemnification, VILLANUEVA filed on 27 August
GRANTED. 1986 a complaint for damages based on breach of contract
and/or quasi-delict before the Regional Trial Court of Makati
[G.R. No. 141011. July 19, 2001] - CITYTRUST BANKING City. VILLANUEVA alleged in his complaint that the BANK
CORPORATION (now Bank of the Philippine breached its contractual obligation to him as a depositor because
Islands), petitioner, vs. ISAGANI C. VILLANUEVA, respondent. of its repeated dishonor of his valid and well-funded check. The
breach arose from the BANKs gross negligence and culpable
recklessness in supplying the wrong account number.
FACTS: Sometime in February 1984, Isagani C. Villanueva
(hereafter VILLANUEVA) opened a savings account and a current After due proceedings, the trial court rendered on 3 July
account with Citytrust Banking Corporation (hereafter the BANK) 1992 a decision dismissing the complaint and the compulsory
with an automatic transfer arrangement. On 21 May 1986, counterclaim for lack of merit. The trial court found that
VILLANUEVA deposited some money in his savings account with VILLANUEVAs negligence set the chain of events which resulted
the BANKs Legaspi Village Branch in Makati, Metro in his alleged losses and damages. VILLANUEVA appealed to the
Manila. Realizing that he had run out of blank checks, Court of Appeals which ruled that when the BANK voluntarily
VILLANUEVA requested a new checkbook from one of the BANKs processed the requisition slip without the requisite account
customer service representatives. number being supplied by the applicant, it in effect took upon
itself the obligation to supply the correct account number. Thus,
He then filled up a checkbook requisition slip with the when the new checkbook was released to VILLANUEVA on 17
obligatory particulars, except for his current account number June 1986, the BANK was deemed to have waived any defect in
which he could not remember. He expressed his predicament to a the requisition slip and estopped from putting the blame on
lady customer service representative of the BANK, who in turn VILLANUEVAs failure to indicate his account number.
assured him that she could supply the information from the The issue of whether VILLANUEVA suffered actual or
BANKs account records. After signing the requisition slip, he gave compensatory damages in the form of loss of profits is
it to her. Pia Rempillo, another customer service representative factual. Both the Court of Appeals and the trial court have
of the BANK, saw VILLANUEVAs checkbook requisition slip. She ascertained that VILLANUEVA was unable to prove his demand
took it and proceeded to check the BANKs checkbook register for compensatory damages arising from loss. His evidence
which contained all the names and account numbers of the thereon was found inadequate, uncorroborated, speculative,
BANKs clients who were issued checkbooks. Upon seeing the hearsay and not the best evidence. Basic is the jurisprudential
name Isagani Villanueva in the checkbook register, Rempillo principle that in determining actual damages, the court cannot
copied the aforesaid account number on the space intended for it rely on mere assertions, speculations, conjectures or guesswork
in VILLANUEVAs requisition slip. but must depend on competent proof and on the best obtainable
On 17 June 1986, VILLANUEVA received from the BANK his evidence of the actual amount of the loss.[18] Actual damages
requested checkbook. On the same day, he immediately signed cannot be presumed but must be duly proved with reasonable
Check No. 396701 bearing the amount of P50,000 payable to the certainty.
order of Kingly Commodities Traders and Multi Resources, Inc. Nonetheless, is VILLANUEVA entitled to the moral damages
VILLANUEVA thereafter delivered the check to Helen Chu, his and attorneys fees granted by the Court of Appeals? Moral
investment consultant at Kingly Commodities. damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright,
Two days later, or on 19 June 1986, VILLANUEVA received serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral
a call from Helen Chu, informing him that she had already placed shock, social humiliation, and similar injury. Although incapable
a trading order in his behalf and delivered the check to Kingly of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be recovered if
Commodities. The check was deposited with the China Banking they are the proximate result of the defendants wrongful act or
Corporation. However, on 23 June 1986, VILLANUEVAs Check No. omission.
396701 was dishonored due to insufficiency of funds and Thus, case law establishes the requisites for the award of
disparity in the signature. VILLANUEVA called Kingly moral damages, viz: (1) there must be an injury, whether
Commodities and explained that there was a mistake in the physical, mental or psychological, clearly sustained by the
dishonor of the check because he had sufficient funds. Forthwith claimant; (2) there must be a culpable act or omission factually
on the same day, VILLANUEVA called up the BANKs Legaspi established; (3) the wrongful act or omission of the defendant is
Village Branch Operations Manager, Maritess Gamboa, and the proximate cause of the injury sustained by the claimant; and
inquired about the dishonor of his well-funded check. (4) the award of damages is predicated on any of the cases stated
On 26 June 1986 at about 4:00 p.m., VILLANUEVA learned in Article 2219 of the Civil Code. Dishonor of the check does not
that his check was again dishonored due to insufficiency of funds entitle him to compensatory damages. But, could the dishonor
and a stop- payment order he allegedly issued. After making the result in his alleged intolerable physical inconvenience and
necessary investigation, Genuino related to VILLANUEVA that the discomfort, extreme humiliation, indignities, etc, which he had
reason for the dishonor of the check was that the account number borne before his peers, trading partners and officers of Kingly
assigned to his new checkbook was the account number of Commodities? True, we find that under the circumstances of this
another depositor also named Isagani Villanueva but with a case, VILLANUEVA might have suffered some form of
different middle initial. inconvenience and discomfort as a result of the dishonor of his
check. However, the same could not have been so grave or
On 30 June 1986, VILLANUEVA sent a letter[9] to the BANK intolerable as he attempts to portray or impress upon us.
addressed to the President, Jose Facundo, demanding
indemnification for alleged losses and damages suffered by him Verily, the alleged embarrassment or inconvenience caused
as a result of the dishonor of his well-funded check. He demanded to VILLANUEVA as a result of the incident was timely and
adequately contained, corrected, mitigated, if not entirely award is made in favor of the litigant, not of his counsel, and the
eradicated. VILLANUEVA, thus, failed to support his claim for litigant, not his counsel, is the judgment creditor who may
moral damages. In short, none of the circumstances mentioned in enforce the judgment for attorney's fees by execution.14 Here, the
Article 2219 of the Civil Code exists to sanction the award for petitioner's claims are based on an alleged contract for
moral damages. The award of attorneys fees should likewise be professional services, with them as the creditors and the private
deleted. The general rule is that attorneys fees cannot be respondents as the debtors.
recovered as part of damages because of the policy that no
premium should be placed on the right to litigate. They are not to In filing the motion for confirmation of attorney's fees,
be awarded every time a party wins a suit. The power of the court petitioners chose to assert their claims in the same action. This is
to award attorneys fees under Article 2208 of the Civil Code also a proper remedy under our jurisprudence. Nevertheless, we
demands factual, legal and equitable justification. WHEREFORE, agree with the respondent court that the confirmation of
the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 40931 is attorney's fees is premature. As it correctly pointed out, the
hereby REVERSED. petition for review on certiorari filed by PHILAMGEN in this
Court (G.R. No. 64834) "may or may not ultimately result in the
G.R. No. 73886 January 31, 1989 granting to the Isasola (sic) family of the total amount of
damages" awarded by the trial court. The Court rendered
JOHN C. QUIRANTE and DANTE CRUZ, petitioners, vs. judgment setting aside the decision of May 4, 1983 of the
THE HONORABLE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, Intermediate Appellate Court in AC-G.R. No. 00202 and ordering
MANUEL C. CASASOLA, and ESTRELLITA C. the respondent Regional Trial Court of Manila to certify the
CASASOLA, respondents. appeal of PHILAMGEN from said trial court's decision in Civil
Case No. 122920 to the Court of Appeal. Said decision of the Court
became final and executory on June 25, 1987. Since the main case
FACTS: Dr. Indalecio Casasola (father of respondents) had a from which the petitioner's claims for their fees may arise has not
contract with a building contractor named Norman GUERRERO. yet become final, the determination of the propriety of said fees
The Philippine American General Insurance Co. Inc. and the amount thereof should be held in abeyance.
(PHILAMGEN, for short) acted as bondsman for GUERRERO. In
view of GUERRERO'S failure to perform his part of the contract
within the period specified, Dr. Indalecio Casasola, thru his ... an attorney's fee cannot be determined until
counsel, Atty. John Quirante, sued both GUERRERO and after the main litigation has been decided and
PHILAMGEN before the Court of first Instance of Manila, now the the subject of recovery is at the disposition of
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila for damages. the court. The issue over attorney's fee only
arises when something has been recovered
from which the fee is to be paid.
The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff by rescinding the
contract. A motion for reconsideration filed by PHILAMGEN was
denied by the trial court. Not satisfied with the decision of the It is further observed that the supposed contract alleged by
trial court, PHILAMGEN filed a notice of appeal but the same was petitioners as the basis for their fees provides that the recovery
not given due course because it was allegedly filed out of time. of the amounts claimed is subject to certain contingencies. It is
The trial court thereafter issued a writ of execution. A petition subject to the condition that the fee shall be P30,000.00 in case of
was filed in AC-G.R. No. 00202 with the Intermediate Appellate recovery of the P120,000.00 surety bond, plus an additional
Court for the quashal of the writ of execution and to compel the amount in case the award is in excess of said P120,000.00 bond,
trial court to give due course to the appeal. The petition was on the sharing basis hereinbefore stated.
dismissed.
We, therefore, take exception to and reject that portion of the
On June 18, 1983, herein petitioner Quirante filed a motion in the decision of the respondent court which holds that the alleged
trial court for the confirmation of his attorney's fees. According to confirmation to attorney's fees should not adversely affect the
him, there was an oral agreement between him and the late Dr. non-signatories thereto, since it is also premised on the eventual
Casasola with regard to his attorney's fees, which agreement was grant of damages to the Casasola family, hence the same
allegedly confirmed in writing by the widow, Asuncion Vda. de objection of prematurity obtains and such a holding may be pre-
Casasola, and the two daughters of the deceased. emptive of factual and evidentiary matters that may be presented
for consideration by the trial court. WHEREFORE, with the
foregoing observation, the decision of the respondent court
HELD: Well settled is the rule that counsel's claim for attorney's subject of the present recourse is hereby AFFIRMED.
fees may be asserted either in the very action in which the
services in question have been rendered, or in a separate action.
If the first alternative is chosen, the Court may pass upon said EXTENT OR SCOPE OF ACTUAL DAMAGES
claim, even if its amount were less than the minimum prescribed
by law for the jurisdiction of said court, upon the theory that the G.R. No. 113578 July 14, 1995
right to recover attorney's fees is but an incident of the case in
which the services of counsel have been rendered ." 12 It also SULPICIO LINES, INC., Petitioner, vs. The Honorable COURT OF
rests on the assumption that the court trying the case is to a APPEALS and TITO DURAN TABUQUILDE and ANGELINA DE
certain degree already familiar with the nature and extent of the PAZ TABUQUILDE, respondents.
lawyer's services. The rule against multiplicity of suits will in
effect be subserved.
FACTS: On October 23, 1988, plaintiff Tito Duran Tabuquilde
(hereinafter, "Tito") and his three-year old daughter Jennifer
What is being claimed here as attorney's fees by petitioners is, Anne boarded the M/V Dona Marilyn at North Harbor, Manila,
however, different from attorney's fees as an item of damages bringing with them several pieces of luggage. In the morning of
provided for under Article 2208 of the Civil Code, wherein the October 24, 1988, the M/V Dona Marilyn, while in transit,
encountered inclement weather which caused huge waves due to carrier." Accordingly, a common carrier is liable for actual or
Typhoon Unsang. Notwithstanding the fact that Storm Signal No. compensatory damages under Article 2206 in relation to Article
2 had been raised by the PAG-ASA authorities over Leyte as early 1764 of the Civil Code for deaths of its passengers caused by the
as 5:30 P.M. of October 23, 1988 and which signal was raised to breach of the contract of transportation. With respect to the
Signal No. 3 by 10 P.M. of the same day, the ship captain ordered award of moral damages, the general rule is that said damages
the vessel to proceed to Tacloban when prudence dictated that he are not recoverable in culpa contractual except when the
should have taken it to the nearest port for shelter, thus violating presence of bad faith was proven. However, in breach of contract
his duty to exercise extraordinary diligence in the carrying of of carriage, moral damages may be recovered when it results in
passengers safely to their destination. the death of a passenger. With respect to the award of exemplary
damages, Article 2232 of the Civil Code of the Philippines gives
At about the same time, plaintiff-appellee Angelina Tabuquilde the Court the discretion to grant said damages in breach of
(hereinafter, "Angelina") mother of Jennifer Anne, contacted the contract when the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent and
Sulpicio Office to verify radio reports that the vessel M/V Dona reckless manner. A common carrier is obliged to transport its
Marilyn was missing. Employees of said Sulpicio Lines assured passengers to their destinations with the utmost diligence of a
her that the ship was merely "hiding" thereby assuaging her very cautious person. The trial court found that petitioner failed
anxiety. to exercise the extraordinary diligence required of a common
carrier, which resulted in the sinking of the M/V Dona Marilyn.
The trial court correctly concluded that the sinking of M/V Dona
At around 2:00 P.M. of October 24, 1988, said vessel capsized, Marilyn was due to gross negligence. WHEREFORE, the decision
throwing plaintiff-appellee Tito and Jennifer Anne, along with of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED.
hundreds of passengers, into the tumultuous sea. Tito tried to
keep himself and his daughter afloat but to no avail as the waves
got stronger and he was subsequently separated from his IN CRIMES AND QUASI-DELICTS
daughter despite his efforts.
G.R. No. 152040 March 31, 2006
He found himself on Almagro Island in Samar the next day at
round (sic) 11:00 A.M. and immediately searched for his daughter MARIKINA AUTO LINE TRANSPORT CORPORATION and
among the survivors in the island, but the search proved fruitless. FREDDIE L. SUELTO, Petitioners, vs. PEOPLE OF THE
In the meantime, Angelina tried to seek the assistance of the PHILIPPINES and ERLINDA V. VALDELLON, Respondents.
Sulpicio Lines in Manila to no avail. Angelina spent sleepless
nights worrying about her husband Tito and daughter Jennifer FACTS: Erlinda V. Valdellon is the owner of a two-door
Anne in view of the refusal of Sulpicio Lines to release a commercial apartment. The Marikina Auto Line Transport
verification of the sinking of the ship. Corporation (MALTC) is the owner-operator of a passenger bus
with Plate Number NCV-849. Suelto, its employee, was assigned
On October 26, 1988, Tito and other survivors in the Almagro as the regular driver of the bus. At around 2:00 p.m. on October 3,
Island were fetched and were brought to Tacloban Medical 1992, Suelto was driving. The bus suddenly swerved to the right
Center for treatment. On October 31, 1988, Tito reported the loss and struck the terrace of the commercial apartment. Upon
of his daughter, was informed that the corpse of a child with his Valdellons request, the court ordered Sergio Pontiveros, the
daughter's description had been found. Subsequently, Tito wrote Senior Building Inspection Officer of the City Engineers Office, to
a letter to his wife, reporting the sad fact that Jennifer Anne was inspect the damaged terrace. Valdellon commissioned Engr. Jesus
dead. Angelina suffered from shock and severe grief upon receipt R. Regal, Jr. to estimate the cost of repairs, inclusive of labor and
of the news. painting, and the latter pegged the cost at P171,088.46.

On November 3, 1988, the coffin bearing the corpse of Jennifer In a letter dated October 19, 1992 addressed to the bus company
Anne was buried in Tanauan, Leyte. On November 24, 1988, a and Suelto, Valdellon demanded payment of P148,440.00, within
claim for damages was filed by Tito with the defendant Sulpicio 10 days from receipt thereof, to cover the cost of the damage to
Lines in connection with the death of the plaintiff-appellee's the terrace. The bus company and Suelto offered a P30,000.00
daughter and the loss of Tito's belongings worth P27,580.00. settlement which Valdellon refused. Valdellon filed a criminal
complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in damage to
On January 3, 1991, the trial court rendered a decision in favor of property against Suelto.
the plaintiffs Tito Duran Tabuquilde and Angelina de Paz
Tabuquilde (private respondents herein) and against defendant Valdellon also filed a separate civil complaint against Suelto and
Sulpicio Lines, Inc.Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals the bus company for damages. During the trial, Valdellon testified
which affirmed the decision of the trial court. Petitioner then filed on the damage caused to the terrace of her apartment, and, in
a motion for reconsideration which was denied. Hence, this support thereof, adduced in evidence a receipt for P35,000.00,
petition. dated October 20, 1993, issued by the BB Construction and Steel
Fabricator for "carpentry, masonry, welding job and electrical
HELD: In the case at bench, the trial court merely mentioned the [work]."
fact of the loss and the value of the contents of the pieces of
baggage without stating the evidence on which it based its Engr. Jesus Regal, Jr., the proprietor of the SSP Construction,
findings. Hence, there can be no basis to award actual damages in declared that he inspected the terrace and estimated the cost of
the amount of P27,850.00. The Court of Appeals was correct in repairs, including labor, at P171,088.46. Trial court rendered
confirming the award of damages for the death of the daughter of judgment finding Suelto guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
private respondents. However, the Civil Code, in Article 1764 reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property. MALTC
thereof, expressly makes Article 2206 applicable "to the death of and Suelto, now appellants, appealed the decision to the CA,
a passenger caused by the breach of contract by a common alleging that the prosecution failed to prove Sueltos guilt beyond
reasonable doubt. They averred that the prosecution merely - Resulting to death
relied on Valdellon, who testified only on the damage caused to
the terrace of her apartment which appellants also alleged was [G.R. Nos. 89404-05. May 22, 1992.]
excessive. On June 20, 2000, the CA rendered judgment affirming
the decision of the trial court, but the award for actual damages PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EFREN
was reduced to P100,000.00. Appellants filed a Motion for DEGOMA and MARINO TABORADA, Defendants, MARINO
Reconsideration, but the CA denied the same. MALTC and Suelto, TABORADA, Defendant-Appellant.
now petitioners, filed the instant petition.
Efren Degoma and Marino D. Taborada were charged with the
ISSUE: Whether or not private respondent was able to prove only crime of robbery with homicide. They were arraigned and after
the amount of P35,000.00 by way of actual damages; hence, the trial, were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
award of P100,000.00 is barren of factual basis. charged.

FACTS: [O]n April 12, 1988, at about 6:30 in the evening, the
HELD: Petitioners failed to prove that petitioner acted on an peace and quiet of the City of Tagbilaran was disturbed by the
emergency caused by the sudden intrusion of a passenger reported robbery with homicide in one of the big business
jeepney into the lane of the bus he was driving. As already establishments, the Tagbilaran Friendly Bazaar. In the course of
maintained and concluded, the severe damages sustained could the commission of the crime, an off-duty but much dedicated
not have resulted had the accused acted as a reasonable and policeman in the person of Pat. Verlito Magallanes was able to
prudent man would. On the second issue, we agree with the collar one of the suspects. The second suspect fell into the
contention of petitioners that respondents failed to prove that custody of the police in the matter of about two hours.
the damages to the terrace caused by the incident amounted
to P100,000.00. The only evidence adduced by respondents to There is no question as to how accused Marino Taborada was
prove actual damages claimed by private respondent were the taken into police custody. He was the first who was collared by
summary computation of damage made by Engr. Jesus R. Regal, Pat. Magallanes. When he was whisked to the police
Jr. amounting to P171,088.46 and the receipt issued by the BB headquarters, he was immediately interrogated and without
Construction and Steel Fabricator to private respondent offering any hard resistance, Taborada told the police that his
for P35,000.00 representing cost for carpentry works, masonry, companion in robbing the store was a PC soldier, Efren Degoma.
welding, and electrical works. Respondents failed to present
Regal to testify on his estimation. In its five-page decision, the 1. The Tagbilaran Friendly Bazaar located along Carlos P. Garcia
trial court awarded P150,000.00 as actual damages to private Avenue, City of Tagbilaran was a victim of robbery on the evening
respondent but failed to state the factual basis for such award. of April 12, 1988, in the sums of US$300 and P200;
Indeed, the trial court merely declared in the decretal portion of
its decision that the "sum of P150,000.00 as reasonable 2. During such robbery, the security guard of the store, in the
compensation sustained by plaintiff for her damaged apartment." person of Alexander Parilla was shot and killed with the use of a
The appellate court, for its part, failed to explain how it arrived at firearm by one of the robbers;
the amount of P100,000.00 in its three-page decision.
3. Accused Taborada was apprehended by the police while still
Under Article 2199 of the New Civil Code, actual damages include grappling with Ciriaco Baculi, the driver of the store;
all the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission
complained of, classified as one for the loss of what a person 4. The police was led to accused Efren Degoma on account of the
already possesses (dao emergente) and the other, for the failure statements made by accused Taborada."
to receive, as a benefit, that which would have pertained to him
(lucro cesante). HELD: In the case at bar, the evidence of conspiracy between
Degoma and Taborada was consistent and clear. Appellant
Under Article 2199 of the Civil Code, actual or compensatory Taborada was penniless at the time of the robbery and needed
damages are those awarded in satisfaction of, or in recompense some transportation money to go back to Cebu City. Taborada
for, loss or injury sustained. Actual damages are not presumed. personally knew his co-accused Degoma and both were seen
The claimant must prove the actual amount of loss with a together immediately prior to the robbery.
reasonable degree of certainty premised upon competent proof
and on the best evidence obtainable. Actual damages cannot be Turning to the civil aspect of the case, the court a quo had
anchored on mere surmises, speculations or conjectures. The overlooked certain evidentiary facts in its award of damages. In
Court further declared that "where goods are destroyed by the delict, the defendant is liable for all damages which are the
wrongful act of defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to their value at natural and probable consequences of the act or omission
the time of the destruction, plus in a proper case, damages for the complained of. 8 To seek recovery for actual damages, it is
loss of the use during the period before replacement. Private necessary to prove with a reasonable degree of certainty,
respondents failed to adduce adequate and competent proof of premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence
the pecuniary loss they actually incurred. Private respondents obtainable by the injured party, the actual amount of loss. The
merely sustained an estimated amount needed for the repair of court a quos award of actual damages in the amount of
the roof of their subject building. We note, however, that P87,947.94 is not sustained by a review of the evidence of record.
petitioners adduced evidence that, in their view, the cost of the Thus, the Court cannot take account of receipts showing expenses
damage to the terrace of private respondent would amount incurred before the date of the slaying of the victim; those
to P55,000.00. Accordingly, private respondent is entitled incurred after a considerable lapse of time from the burial of the
to P55,000.00 actual damages. victim and which do not have any relation to the death, wake or
burial of the victim; those incurred for purely aesthetic or social
purposes, such as the lining with marble of the tomb of the
victim; those which appear to have been modified to show an
increase in the amount of expenditure, such as by adding a
number to increase the purchase value from tens to hundreds; in a criminal proceeding without need of proof. The fact that they
those expenditures which could not be reasonably itemized or suffered the trauma of mental or physical and psychological
determined to have been incurred in connection with the death, sufferings which constitute the basis for moral damages under
wake or burial of the victim; those which would nonetheless have the Civil Code are too obvious to still require recital thereof at
been incurred despite the death, wake or burial of the victim, the trial.
death, wake or burial being merely incidental; and those which
were not in fact shouldered by the immediate heirs of the victim, [G.R. No. 108772. January 14, 1998]
such as plane trips by relatives or in-laws. Having these as
guidelines, the Court puts the gross expenses proved by the
immediate heirs of the victim at P10,175.85. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROLLY
OBELLO y PROQUITO, accused-appellant.
The Court off-sets the amount of P6,400.00, representing the The Facts: Sometime in [sic] September 1, 1991 at around 4:00
alms received by the heirs of the victim, 11 against the above p.m. Ricardo de la Cruz was playing mahjongg [sic] together with
amount of P10,175.85, representing the expenses proved, leaving four (4) others in the store of a certain May at Riverside Street,
the amount of P3,775.85 as the actual amount of loss sustained Barangay Commonwealth, Quezon City. Suddenly, he heard
by immediate heirs of the victim. The moral damages in the people shouting outside. Immediately, Ricardo rushed outside of
amount of P200,000.00 awarded by the court a quo are the store and saw Rolly Obello holding Danilo de Claro by his two
unexplained and unsupported in the courts decision. While (2) arms and a certain Antonio Go (Tony) who came from the
moral damages are incapable of pecuniary estimation, the Court, back of Rolly suddenly stabbed Danilo on the abdomen with a fan
under the circumstances attending the loss, considers it proper to knife. After stabbing Danilo, Tony and Rolly ran away.As soon as
reduce the amount of the award for moral damages to the two fled, Ricardo returned to Danilo to help him. When
P10,000.00. The Court, however, hereby increases the amount of Ricardo lifted Danilo, he noticed that blood was oozing from
indemnity for the death of Alexander Parilla to P50,000.00 in line Danilos chest, so he inserted his finger on the stab wound to stop
with present jurisprudence. the flow of blood but the same proved to be futile. Ricardo
together with Danilo de Claro, Jr. carried Danilo and brought him
G.R. No. 128285 November 27, 2001 to the hospital. At the hospital, they were informed by the
attending physician that Danilo suffered three (3) stab wounds
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. which caused his death.However, of the three (3) stab wounds
ANTONIO PLANA alias "CATONG" EDGARDO PERAYRA, RENE suffered by Danilo, Ricardo only witnessed Tony deliver his last
SALDEVEA and RICHARD BANDAY,defendant-appellants. stab blow which hit Danilos abdomen.
Version of the Defense: Accused Rolly Obellos defense is denial.
The Information filed against accused-appellants reads:
The Issue: In the main, appellant assails the credibility of the
prosecution witnesses.
That on or about 10:30 o'clock in the morning of September 23, 1994, at
Brgy. Cubi, Dumarao, Capiz, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, the
above-named accused did, then and there, wilfully and feloniously, and The Courts Ruling: The appeal is not meritorious.
by conspiring and helping one another, gang-up and have carnal
knowledge of HELEN PIROTE [should read Helen Perote] against her Damages
will, and, thereafter, by means of cruelty which augmented her
suffering, did, then and there, strike, mangle and stab said HELEN The trial court ordered the payment of indemnity of fifty
PIROTE several times with both blunt and sharp-edged weapons thousand pesos and reimbursement of six thousand pesos for
thereby inflicting upon her serious multiple wounds causing massive
hemorrhage which resulted to [sic] her death.
funeral expenses. We sustain the award of indemnity, but we
delete the reimbursement for funeral expenses for lack of factual
support. Civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000 is
At their arraignment, accused-appellants pleaded not guilty. automatically granted to the heirs of the victim without need of
Linda Perote, the victim's mother, described on the witness stand any evidence other than the fact of the commission of the
the shock, grief and anguish that she felt upon learning of her crime. The amount of funeral expenses, however, must be proven
daughter's death. She averred that the family spent almost fifty by competent evidence, e.g. receipts. It cannot rest on the bare
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) for Helen's wake and burial. allegation of the heirs of the offended party, as in this case.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is hereby DENIED and the assailed
On November 23, 1996, after due trial, a judgment was rendered Decision is AFFIRMED, but the award of funeral expenses is
by the trial court finding accused-appellants guilty beyond hereby DELETED.
reasonable doubt of the crime of rape with homicide. Accused-
appellants vigorously deny that they committed the rape and - Loss of earning capacity
killing of Helen. After a careful review of the evidence on record,
the Court is constrained to affirm the judgment of conviction of G.R. No. L-25499 February 18, 1970
accused-appellants. The testimony of Lagud positively identifying
accused-appellants as the perpetrators of the dastardly crime VILLA REY TRANSIT, INC., petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF
was corroborated in its material points by the testimonies of the APPEALS, TRINIDAD A. QUINTOS, PRIMA A. QUINTOS, AND
other prosecution witnesses. However, there is need to modify JULITA A. QUINTOS, respondents.
the damages awarded to the heirs of Helen by the trial court. In
addition to the sum of P25,000.00 as actual damages, the trial
court awarded to the heirs of Helen the sum of P50,000.00 as civil FACTS: At about 1:30 in the morning of March 17, 1960, an Izuzu
indemnity. This amount should be increased in consonance with First Class passenger bus owned and operated by the defendant,
prevailing jurisprudence 46 fixing the civil indemnity in cases of bearing Plate No. TPU-14871-Bulacan and driven by Laureano
rape with homicide at P100,000.00. The Court, likewise, finds it Casim, left Lingayen, Pangasinan, for Manila. Among its paying
proper to award the sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages. The passengers was the deceased, Policronio Quintos, Jr. who sat on
award of moral damages may be made to the heirs of the victim the first seat, second row, right side of the bus. At about 4:55
o'clock a.m. when the vehicle was nearing the northern approach With respect to the rate at which the damages shall be computed,
of the Sadsaran Bridge on the national highway in barrio Sto. petitioner impugns the decision appealed from upon the ground
Domingo, municipality of Minalin, Pampanga, it frontally hit the that the damages awarded therein will have to be paid now,
rear side of a bullcart filled with hay. As a result the end of a whereas most of those sought to be indemnified will be
bamboo pole placed on top of the hayload and tied to the cart to suffered years later. Just the same, the force of the said argument
hold it in place, hit the right side of the windshield of the bus. The of petitioner herein is offset by the fact that, although payment of
protruding end of the bamboo pole, about 8 feet long from the the award in the case at bar will have to take place upon the
rear of the bullcart, penetrated through the glass windshield and finality of the decision therein, the liability of petitioner herein
landed on the face of Policronio Quintos, Jr. The pole landed on had been fixed at the rate only of P2,184.00 a year, which is the
his left eye and the bone of the left side of his face was fractured. annual salary of Policronio Quintos, Jr. at the time of his death, as
He suffered other multiple wounds and was rendered a young "training assistant" in the Bacnotan Cement Industries,
unconscious. Inc. Indeed, upon the conclusion of his training period, he was
supposed to have a better job and be promoted from time to time,
Said respondents herein brought this action against herein and, hence, to earn more, if not considering the growing
petitioner, Villa Rey Transit, Inc., as owner and operator of said importance of trade, commerce and industry and the
passenger bus, for breach of the contract of carriage between said concomitant rise in the income level of officers and employees
petitioner and the deceased Policronio Quintos, Jr., to recover the therein much more.
aggregate sum of P63,750.00 as damages, including attorney's
fees. Said petitioner defendant in the court of first instance All things considered, We are of the opinion that it is fair and
contended that the mishap was due to a fortuitous event, but this reasonable to fix the deductible living and other expenses of the
pretense was rejected by the trial court and the Court of Appeals, deceased at the sum of P1,184.00 a year, or about P100.00 a
both of which found that the accident and the death of Policronio month, and that, consequently, the loss sustained by his sisters
had been due to the negligence of the bus driver, for whom may be roughly estimated at P1,000.00 a year or P33,333.33 for
petitioner was liable under its contract of carriage with the the 33-1/3 years of his life expectancy. To this sum of
deceased. Such decision is affirmed by the Court of Appeals. P33,333.33, the following should be added: (a) P12,000.00,
pursuant to Arts. 104 and 107 of the Revised Penal Code, in
ISSUE: amount of damages recoverable by private respondents relation to Article 2206 of our Civil Code, as construed and
herein. applied by this Court;8 (b) P1,727.95, actually spent by private
respondents for medical and burial expenses; and (c) attorney's
fee, which was fixed by the trial court, at P500.00, but which, in
HELD: The determination of such amount depends, mainly upon view of the appeal taken by petitioner herein, first to the Court of
two (2) factors, namely: (1) the number of years on the basis of Appeals and later to this Supreme Court, should be increased to
which the damages shall be computed and (2) the rate at which P2,500.00. In other words, the amount adjudged in the decision
the losses sustained by said respondents should be fixed. The appealed from should be reduced to the aggregate sum of
first factor was based by the trial court the view of which was P49,561.28, with interest thereon, at the legal rate, from
concurred in by the Court of Appeals upon the life expectancy December 29, 1961, date of the promulgation of the decision of
of Policronio Quintos, Jr., which was placed at 33-1/3 years he the trial court. Thus modified, said decision and that of the Court
being over 29 years of age (or around 30 years for purposes of of Appeals are hereby affirmed, in all other respects, with costs
computation) at the time of his demise by applying the against petitioner, Villa Rey Transit, Inc. It is so ordered.
formula (2/3 x [80-301 = life expectancy) adopted in the
American Expectancy Table of Mortality or the actuarial of
Combined Experience Table of Mortality. G.R. No. 137457 November 21, 2001

The determination of the indemnity to be awarded to the heirs of PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROSAURO
a deceased person has therefore no fixed basis. Much is left to the SIA y DICHOSO, JOHNNY BALALIO y DEZA, JIMMY PONCE y
discretion of the court considering the moral and material TOL and JOHN DOE @ PEDRO MUOZ (at large), accused-
damages involved, and so it has been said that "(t)here can be no appellants.
exact or uniform rule for measuring the value of a human life and
the measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise FACTS: Christian Bermudez was beaten to death and the taxicab
mathematical calculation, but the amount recoverable depends on he was driving was taken by the assailants. His lifeless body,
the particular facts and circumstances of each case. The life wrapped in a carton box, was recovered several days later in a
expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is fishpond in Meycauayan, Bulacan. At the arraignment, only
shorter, is an important factor.' Other factors that are usually Johnny Balalio y Deza and Jimmy Ponce y Tol appeared and
considered are: (1) pecuniary loss to plaintiff or beneficiary; (2) pleaded "Not Guilty." The third accused, Rosauro Sia y Dichoso,
loss of support; (3) loss of service; (4) loss of society; (5) mental escaped from police custody while on the way to the hospital for
suffering of beneficiaries; and (6) medical and funeral expenses. treatment. After trial, the court a quo rendered judgment against
both accused imposing upon them the supreme penalty of Death.
Thus, life expectancy is, not only relevant, but, also,
an important element in fixing the amount recoverable by private The vehicle claimed as carnapped is registered in the name of
respondents herein. Although it is not the sole element complainant Bienvenido C. Cruz, operated as a taxi being Unit 2 of
determinative of said amount, no cogent reason has been given to KIRBEE TAXI. The said taxi was taken from the garage and driven
warrant its disregard and the adoption, in the case at bar, of a by its regular driver, Christian Bermudez, the alleged murder
purely arbitrary standard, such as a four-year rule. In short, the victim at about 6:00 a.m. on August 23, 1995. In the meantime,
Court of Appeals has not erred in basing the computation of Bienvenido Cruz, the owner of the carnapped vehicle, reported to
petitioner's liability upon the life expectancy of Policronio the police authorities in Camp Crame the loss of his taxi.11 On
Quintos, Jr. September 21, 1995, at about 10:30 p.m., the carnapped taxi was
intercepted being driven by accused Rosauro Sia, who was
immediately placed in custody of the anti-carnapping authorities.
While in custody, Rosauro Sia managed to escape but he was
recaptured on November 15, 1995 by the manhunt team created
for that purpose.

HELD: Anent the civil indemnity award, this Court finds the
amount of P50,000.00 as death indemnity proper, following
prevailing jurisprudence, and in line with controlling policy. The
award of civil indemnity may be granted without any need of
proof other than the death of the victim. Though not awarded by
the trial court, the victim's heirs are likewise entitled to moral
damages, pegged at P50,000.00 by controlling case law,51 taking
into consideration the pain and anguish of the victim's
family52 brought about by his death.

However, the award of P200,000.00 as burial and other expenses


incurred in connection with the death of the victim must be
deleted. The records are bereft of any receipt or voucher to
justify the trial court's award of burial and other expenses
incurred in connection with the victim's death. The rule is that
every pecuniary loss must be established by credible evidence
before it may be awarded.

The trial court was correct in awarding damages for loss of


earning capacity despite the non-availability of documentary
evidence. In determining the amount of lost income, the following
must be taken into account: (1) the number of years for which
the victim would otherwise have lived; and (2) the rate of the loss
sustained by the heirs of the deceased. The second variable is
computed by multiplying the life expectancy by the net earnings
of the deceased, meaning total earnings less expenses necessary
in the creation of such earnings or income less living and other
incidental expenses. Considering that there is no proof of living
expenses of the deceased, net earnings are computed at fifty
percent (50%) of the gross earnings.58 The formula used by this
Court in computing loss of earning capacity is:

Net Earning = [2/3 x (80 - age at time of death) x (gross annual income -
Capacity reasonable and necessary living expenses)]59

In this case, the Court notes that the victim was 27 years old at
the time of his death and his mother testified that as a driver of
the Tamaraw FX taxi, he was earning P650.00 a day.60 Hence, the
damages payable for the loss of the victim's earning capacity is
computed thus:

Gross Annual Earnings = P650 x 261 working days in a year


= P169,650.00
Net Earning Capacity = 2/3 x (80-27) x [P169,650.00 - P84,825.00]
= 35.33 x 84,825.00
= P2,996,867.20

Based on the foregoing computation, the award of the trial court


with regard to lost income is thus modified accordingly.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai