TORTS & DAMAGES FINALS

•If the physician discovers, or should know or discover,

NEGLIGENCE OF HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS that the patient’s ailment is beyond his knowledge or
technical skill, ability or capacity to treat with a likelihood of
Primary objective: reasonable success, he is also under duty to disclose that
The preservation of life and maintenance of the health of the fact to the patient and advise him of the necessity of other
people or different treatment.

The duty of the physician has its foundation in public

consideration; any slip or breach in the performance of that • It has also been recognized that there exists a duty on
duty, no matter how small, is corrosive of that public faith. the part of the physician to advise his patient to consult a
specialist or one qualified in a method of treatment which
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE the physician is not qualified to give.
This is a particular form of negligence which consists in the
failure of a physician or surgeon to apply to his practice of • the fact that a physician or surgeon renders his services
medicine that degree of care and skill which is ordinarily gratuitously does not absolve him from the duty to use
employed by the profession generally under similar reasonable and ordinary care, skill and diligence
conditions, and in like surrounding circumstances

• Also, an offer to perform a second operation to remedy

Elements of medical negligence: the effect of an unskillful or carelessly performed former
1. Duty; operation or treatment is no defense to an action for
2. Breach; malpractice in the first operation or treatment and although
3. Injury; and the principle of volenti non fit injuria has been invoked to
4. proximate causation prevent a recovery, consent of the patient to an operation
does not ordinarily relieve defendant from liability
Some acts or omissions constituting negligence or
malpractice: Standard of Care
(a) wrong diagnosis, when such results from want of
requisite skill or care; GENERAL RULE:
(b) unwarranted abandonment of a case after its
assumption, at least where he does not give Required to possess and exercise the degree of
reasonable notice or pro- vide a competent physician skill and learning ordinarily possessed and exercised under
in his place; similar circumstances by the members of his profession in
(c) operating without patient’s consent where a patient good standing, and to use ordinary and reasonable care and
is in possession of his faculties and in such physical diligence, and his best judgment, in the application of his
health as to be able to consult about his condition, skill to the case
and no emergency exists in making it impracticable
to confer with him, or without the consent of the EXCEPTION:
parents, spouse or guardian, in the absence of an
emergency; A physician holding himself out as having special
knowledge and skill in the treatment of a particular organ,
Some acts or omissions constituting negligence or disease or type of injury is bound to bring to the discharge
malpractice of his duty to a patient employing him as such specialist,
not merely the average degree of skill possessed by general
practitioners, but that special degree of skill and knowledge
(a) failing to give the patient or his family or attendants
possessed by physicians who devote special study and
all necessary and proper instructions as to the care
attention to the treatment of such organ, disease or injury,
and attention to be given to the patient and the
regard being had of the state of scientific knowledge at the
cautions to be observed;
time
(b) allowing a foreign substance to enter or remain in
the body of the person operated on, and this extends
to the sponges and pads; Case: Dr. Ninevetch Cruz v. CA
(c) failing to give warning when at- tending to a patient
afflicted with contagious or infectious disease, Whether or not a physician committed an inexcusable lack
(d) writing an erroneous prescription; or of precaution in the treatment of his patient is to be
(e) issuing wrongful certificate of insanity or inebriety determined according to the standard of care observed by
other members of the profession in good standing under
NOTE: similar circumstances bearing in mind the advanced state of
the profession at the time of treatment or the present state
of medical science.
•a doctor has the duty to inform the patient fully of his
condition, and of the results of the tests made.

1
General Practitioners vs. Specialist the standard of care • Causation frequently is divided into two separate
demanded from a general practitioner is ordinary care and inquiries:
diligence in the application of his knowledge and skill in his 1) whether the professional’s actions in fact caused
practice of the profession. He ought to apply to his patient the harm to the patient, and
what other general practitioners will apply when confronted
with similar situation.
2) whether the professional’s actions were the
proximate cause of the patient’s harm.
Captain of the Ship Doctrine:
Case: Garcia vs. Salvador GR No. 168512
The head surgeon is made responsible for everything that
goes wrong within the four corners of the operating room. Four elements that establish negligence in medical practice
It enunciates the liability of the surgeon not only for the
wrongful acts of those who are under his physical control but Facts:
also those wherein he has extension of control.
Salvador was working as a trainee with Limay Bulk Handling
NOT WARRANTORS OR INSURERS
Terminal. As a requirement for her regular employment,
she underwent a medical examination at the Community
Four elements that establish negligence in medical practice:
Diagnostic Center (CDC) wherein she was made to go
through a hepatitis examination conducted by Garcia, its
1. Duty- The duty owed to the patient medical technologist. When the results came, it showed she
was hepatitis positive. Her results bore the name of Garcia
• It undertaken as soon as a doctor agrees to examine as examiner, and a rubber stamp signature of Castro as
the case, which implies the establishment of doctor- pathologist.
patient relationship
• The relationship is created when the patient engages Because of the results of her medical examination, she was
in the services of the doctor and the doctor agrees to terminated from employment for failure to pass the medical
provide care to the patient examination
• By accepting a case, the doctor or hospital
commenced the duty to render medical service in Additionally, when she told her father of the news, her
favor of the patient in accordance with the expected father had a heart attack and was confined at the Bataan
training and skill of a medical practitioner (Garcia- Doctor’s Hospital
Rueda vs. Pacasio)
Salvador underwent a procedure in the latter hospital
2. Breach- “Whosoever causes damage to another by an similar to the one she underwent through at CDC. In this
offense shall make it good.” particular procedure, the results came in NEGATIVE. She
informed her employer of the different result of the test,
and the company asked her to undergo the same tests back
• Breach of the standard of care expected of other
in CDC.
similarly trained medical professionals acting under
the same circumstances
The confirmatory testing showed that Salvador was
3. Injury- Injury, liability, or even death, arises as a hepatitis NEGATIVE and CDC issued a certificate correcting
consequence of a negligent medical treatment/procedure the initial result

• Injury to the patient should be the direct result of Therein after, Salvador was rehired. Salvador filed a
the doctor’s beach complaint for damages against Garcia and Castro, claiming
• “Was the party who allegedly caused the injury that by reason of the erroneous interpretation of her
behaving as carefully and as a reasonable person results, she lost her job and suffered serious mental
would have behaved under the same circumstances? anxiety, and her father was hospitalized
If not, then that party was negligent and committed
the tort of negligence” Issue: WON CDC is liable for the misinterpretation of the
test results.
4. Proximate Causation- The act or omission complained of is
the proximate cause of the injury suffered. The proximate
Ruling: YES
cause of an injury is that cause that, in the natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
TEST OF NEGLIGENCE FOR HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS
cause, produces the injury, and without which the result
1. DUTY
would not have occurred. (Vda. de Bataclan v. Medina, 102
2. BREACH
Phil. 181, 186 [1957].)
3.INJURY
4. PROXIMATE CAUSATION
2
 • REASON: Because as a general rule, when the
Owners and operators of clinical laboratories have the duty to qualifications of a physician are admitted, it is PRESUMED
comply with statutes, as well as rules and regulations, THAT IN PROPER CASES HE TAKES THE NECESSARY
purposely promulgated to protect and promote the health of PRECAUTION AND EMPLOYS THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE
the people by preventing the operation of substandard, AND SKILL IN ATTENDING TO HIS CLIENTS
improperly managed and inadequately supported clinical • EXC: IF THE CONTRARY IS PROVED (through expert
laboratories and by improving the quality of performance of opinion)
clinical laboratory examinations. • IOW, the GR is rebuttable by expert opinion

Their business is impressed with public interest, as such, high GARCIA-RUEDA vs. PASCASIO 278 SCRA 769
standards of performance are expected from them.

Ruling:
Sec. 9. Management of the Clinical Laboratory:
• In accepting a case, a doctor in effect represents that,
having the needed training and skill possessed by
9.1 Head of the Clinical Laboratory: The head is that person
physicians and surgeons practicing in the same field, he will
who assumes technical and administrative supervision and
employ such training, care and skill in the treatment of his
control of the activities in the laboratory.
patients. He therefore has a duty to use at least the same
level of care that any other reasonably competent doctor
• For all categories of clinical laboratories, the head would use to treat a condition under the same
shall be a licensed physician certified by the circumstances.
Philippine Board of Pathology in either Anatomic or
Clinical Pathology or both provided that:
• It is in this aspect of medical malpractice that expert
• (1) This shall be mandatory for all categories of free-
testimony is essential to establish not only the standard of
standing clinical laboratories; all tertiary category
care of the profession but also that the physician's conduct
hospital laboratories and for all secondary category
in the treatment and care falls below such standard.
hospital laboratories located in areas with sufficient
Further, inasmuch as the causes of the injuries involved in
available pathologist. Xxxx
malpractice actions are determinable only in the light of
• scientific knowledge, it has been recognized that expert
Sec. 11. Reporting: All laboratory requests shall be testimony is usually necessary to support the conclusion as
considered as consultations between the requesting physician to causation
and pathologist of the laboratory. As such all laboratory • The evidence typically required takes the form of a
reports on various examinations of human specimens shall be TESTIMONY BY OTHER DOCTORS IN THE SAME OR
construed as consultation report and shall bear the name of RELATED FIELDS OF PRACTICE and of MEDICAL
the pathologist or his associate. No person in clinical LITERATURE and REGULATIONS that have been duly proven
laboratory shall issue a report, orally or in writing, whole before the court.
portions thereof without a directive from the pathologist or
his authorized associate and only to the requesting physician
• Evidence should also be presented to prove that the
or his authorized representative except in emergencies when
doctor failed to abide by these standards
the results may be released as authorized by the pathologist.

• TERMINATED • Absent the finding of these standards, a finding of liability

• SUFFERED ANXIETY can be difficult to sustain.
• COMPELLED TO UNDERGO SEVERAL TESTS
• All injuries sustained by Salvador could have been PROOF OF MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
avoided had the proper safeguards in conducting the
clinical examination were followed in conducting the Q: Who has the burden of proof of establishing negligence
clinical examination by a medical practitioner?

PROOF
A: PLAINTIFF
Q: How do we determine whether or not the physician
exercised the requisite degree of skill and care in the GR: EVIDENCE AGAINST THE DOCTOR MUST BE PROVED
treatment of his patients? BY PRESENTING AN EXPERT WITNESS

EXPERT TESTIMONY EXC: RES IPSA LOQUITUR

• “The deference of courts to the expert opinion of qualified • “the thing speaks for itself”
physicians stems from the former’s realization that the latter
possess unusual technical skills which laymen in most • The need for expert testimony can be dispensed
instances are incapable intelligently evaluating, hence the with
indispensability of expert testimonies” (Li vs. Soliman GR
No165279)
3
 • Limited to cases where the court from its fund of ISSUES: Whether or not the private respondents were
common knowledge can determine the standard of negligent and thereby caused the comatose condition of
care Ramos.

• These are the cases where an ordinary layman can

HELD: Yes, private respondents were all negligent and are
conclude that there was negligence on the part of
solidarily liable for the damages.
the doctor. Situations where a layman is able to say,
as a matter of common knowledge and observation,
that the consequences of professional care were not This doctrine, Res Ipsa Loquitur, finds application in this
as such as would ordinarily have followed due care case. On the day of the operation, Erlinda Ramos already
had been exercised (Reyes vs. Sisters of Mary) surrendered her person to the private respondents who had
complete and exclusive control over her. Apart from the
• Resorted to when there is no other way, under the gallstone problem, she was neurologically sound and fit
usual and ordinary conditions, by which the patient Then, after the procedure, she was comatose and brain
can obtain redress for the injuries suffered damaged—res ipsa loquitur!—the thing speaks for itself!

• Res ipsa loquitur – a procedural or evidentiary rule In the present case, Erlinda submitted herself for
which means “the thing or the transaction speaks for cholecystectomy and expected a routine general surgery to
itself.” It is a maxim for the rule that the fact of the be performed on her gall bladder. On that fateful day she
occurrence of an injury, taken with the surrounding delivered her person over to the care, custody and control
circumstances, may permit an inference or raise a of private respondents who exercised complete and
presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s exclusive control over her. At the time of submission,
prima facie case, and present a question of fact for Erlinda was neurologically sound and, except for a few
defendant to meet with an explanation, where minor discomforts, was likewise fit in mind and body.
ordinarily in a medical malpractice case, the
complaining party must present expert testimony to However, during administration of anesthesia and prior to
prove that the attending physician was negligent the performance of cholecystectomy she suffered
(Ramos vs CA GR No. 124354) irreparable damage to her brain. Thus, without undergoing
surgery, she went out of the operating room already
decerebrate and totally incapacitated.
Case: RAMOS vs. CA GR No. 124354
Obviously, brain damage which Erlinda sustained does not
normally occur in the process of a gall bladder operation. In
Application of Res Ipsa Loquitur in medical negligence
fact, this kind of situation does not happen in the absence
of negligence of someone in the administration of
FACTS: anesthesia and in the use of endotracheal tube. Normally, a
person being put under anesthesia is not rendered
Erlinda Ramos underwent a surgical procedure to remove decerebrate as a consequence of administering such
stone from her gall bladder (cholecystectomy). They hired Dr. anesthesia if the proper procedure was followed.
Hosaka, a surgeon, to conduct the surgery at the De Los
Santos Medical Center (DLSMC). Hosaka assured them that Furthermore, the instruments used in the administration of
he would find a good anesthesiologist. But the operation did anesthesia, including the endotracheal tube, were all under
not go as planned, Dr. Hosaka arrived 3 hours late for the the exclusive control of private respondents, who are the
operation, Dra. Gutierrez, the anesthesiologist “botched” the physicians- in-charge. Likewise, petitioner Erlinda could not
administration of the anesthesia causing Erlinda to go into a have been guilty of contributory negligence because she
coma and suffer brain damage. The botched operation was was under the influence of anesthetics which rendered her
witnessed by Herminda Cruz, sister in law of Erlinda and Dean unconscious.
of College of Nursing of Capitol Medical Center.
Considering that a sound and unaffected member of the
The family of Ramos (petitioners) sued the hospital, the unconscious and under the immediate and exclusive control
surgeon and the anesthesiologist for damages. The of dictates
petitioners showed expert testimony showing that Erlinda's the application of res ipsa loquitur. Upon these facts and
condition was caused by the anesthesiologist in not exercising under these circumstances the Court would be able to say,
reasonable care in “intubating” Erlinda. Eyewitnesses heard as a matter of common knowledge and observation, if
the anesthesiologist saying “Ang hirap ma-intubate nito, mali negligence attended the management and care of the
yata ang pagkakapasok. O lumalaki ang tiyan.” patient. Moreover, the liability of the physicians and the
hospital in this case is not predicated upon an alleged
failure to secure the desired results of an operation nor on
Diagnostic tests prior to surgery showed that Erlinda was an alleged lack of skill in the diagnosis or treatment as in
robust and fit to undergo surgery. fact no operation or treatment was ever performed on
Erlinda.

4
Thus, upon all these initial determination a case is made out
for the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
• Lastly, when a doctor refers a patient for admission in the
hospital, it is the doctor who prescribes the treatment to be
TN: the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur does not automatically
given to said patient.
apple to all cases of medical negligence

ELEMENTS The hospitals obligation is limited to:

In cases involving medical negligence, the doctrine of res ipsa  Providing the patient with the preferred room
loquitur allows the mere existence of an injury to justify a accomodation, the nutritional diet and medications
presumption of negligence on the part of the person who prescribed by the doctor.
controls the instrument causing the injury, provided that the
following requisites concur:  Providing the equipment and facilities necessary for
1. The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not the treatment of the patient.
occur in the absence of someone’s negligence;
 As well as the services of the hospital staff who
2. It is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive perform the ministerial tasks of ensuring that the
control of the defendant or defendants; and doctors orders are carried out strictly.

3. the possibility of contributing conduct would make  A hospital does not pay any of its consultants for
the plaintiff responsible is eliminated. (Dr. Fernando medical services rendered by the latter to their
Solidum va. Pp,. ) respective patients.

Cases where Res Ipsa Loquitur has been applied  Moreover, the contract between the consultant in
hospitals and his patient is separate and distinct from
Thus, courts of other jurisdictions have applied the doctrine in the contract between hospital and said patient.
the following situations:
Case: Cruz vs Court of Appeals GR No. 122445
November 18, 1997
1. leaving of a foreign object in the body of the
patient after an operation.
Medical malpractice suit – type of claim which a victim has
available to him/her to redress a wrong committed by a
2 injuries sustained on a healthy part of the body medical professional which has caused bodily harm; most
which was not under, or in the area, of treatment often brought as a civil action for damages under NCC 2176
3. removal of the wrong part of the body when or a criminal case under RPC 365, with which a civil action
another part was intended. for damages is impliedly instituted.

4. knocking out a tooth while a patient's jaw was Facts:

under anesthetic for the removal of his tonsils,
Lydia Umali was examined by Dr. Cruz who found a myoma
in her uterus, and scheduled her for a hysterectomy
5. loss of an eye while the patient plaintiff was under operation on 23 Mar 1991. Rowena Umali de Ocampo
the influence of anesthetic, during or following an accompanied her mother to the hospital a day before the
operation for appendicitisAmong other cases. operation. Rowena noticed that the clinic was untidy.The
following day, Rowena asked Dr. Cruz if the operation could
LIABILITY OF HOSPITALS AND CONSULTANTS be postponed, but Lydia told her daughter that Dr. Cruz
said that the operation must go on as scheduled.
The hospital itself is not liable under Article 2180 in the
absence of employer-employee relationship. Lydia died while Dr. Cruz was closing her abdominal wall.
Immediate cause of death is shock; disseminated
intravascular coagulation (DIC) as antecedent cause.
• First, a hospital does not hire or engage the services of a
consultant, but rather accredits the latter and grants him/her
Dr. Cruz and Dr. Ercillo were charged with reckless
the privilege of maintaining a clinic and/or admitting patients
imprudence and negligence resulting in homicide of Lydia
in the hospital.
Umali. The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) found Dr.
Ercillo not guilty for insufficiency of evidence against her,
• Second, it is not the hospital but the patient who pays the but held Dr. Cruz responsible for Umali’s death. RTC and CA
consultants fee for services rendered by the latter. affirmed MTCC.

• Third, a hospital does not dismiss a consultant instead the Manifestation of negligence:
latter may lose his/her accreditation or privileges granted by  untidiness of clinic
the hospital.  lack of provision of supplies

5
  the fact that the transfer was needed meant that involved the husband of Mrs. Atienza the compalinants case
there was something wrong in the way Dr. Cruz was dismissed not because of the service rendered by Atty.
conducted operation Evangelista but because of the failure of the complainant’s
 no showing that pre-surgery procedure (clearance, witness to submit to cross examination. This is clear from a
blood typing/tests) was conducted. reading of Fiscal’s Memorandum. The said memorandum
reads that: the hearing of the case of Atienza has been
Issue: WON the circumstances are sufficient to sustain a continuously postponed several times because of the failure
judgment of conviction against Dr. Cruz for reckless of the prosecution witness to appear. Should they be unable
imprudence resulting in homicide. to produce the witnesses at the next hearing they would
submit their case on the basis of the evidence already on
Ruling: NO. DR. CRUZ IS ACQUITTED, BUT SHE IS STILL record that on October 25, 1972 only the counsel for the
CIVILLY LIABLE (50K civil liability; 100k moral damages, 50k complainant appeared. His client did not and their witness
exemplary damages) did not arrive.

The testimonies of the doctors presented by the prosecution ISSUE: Whether the respondent was wilfully negligent in
establish hemorrhage / hemorrhagic shock as the cause of the performance of his duties as a counsel to the
death, which may be caused by several different factors. complainant to the damage and prejudice of the latter.
Autopsy did not reveal any untied cut blood vessel, nor was
there a tie of a cut blood vessel that became loose. The RULING: The complaint against Atty. Evangelista was
findings of the doctors do not preclude the probability that a dismissed.
clotting defect (DIC) caused the hemorrhage and
consequently, Lydia’s death. The dismissal case of Mrs. Atienza case is not imputable to
respondent. A member of the bar cannot be subject to a
The Court has no recourse but to rely on the expert disbarment simply because of decision adverse to his client.
testimonies that substantiate Dr. Cruz’ allegation that the
cause of Lydia’s death was DIC, which cannot be attributed to This court is in agreement. It would place an intolerable
Dr. Cruz’ fault or negligence. This probability was unrebutted burden on a member of the bar if it just because a client
during trial. Thus her acquittal of the crime of reckless jailed to obtain what is sought by her after due exertion of
imprudence resulting in homicide. the required effort on his part he would be held liable.
Success in a litigation is certainly not the test of whether or
not a lawyer had lived up to his duties to a client. It is had
LIABILITIES OF THE LAWYER taken all the steps to prosecute his suit. It is enough that
he had taken that with all thorough preparation of the case
Canon 18 - governs the conduct of lawyers. handled him. If thereafter the result would be frustration of
his client hopes that is a cause for disappointment no doubt
for him no less for his client but bot for disciplinary action.
Provides that “a lawyer shall serve his client with competence
and diligence. It is his responsibility not to undertake a legal Negligence Of Accountants And Auditors
service he knows or should know that he is not qualified to
render. He is also enjoined not to handle any legal matter SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE
without adequate preparation. • Part of a financial professional includes errors that an
average, reasonable accountant would not make.
Canon 18.03 - provides that “A lawyer shall not neglect a
legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in These errors might include:
connection therewith shall render him liable. • Poorly kept financial books
• Accounts receivable errors
• Incorrect advice on accounting matters
Case: Atienza V Evangelista
• Mistakes on tax returns
• Faulty estate planning advice
Facts: • Faulty audits
• Failure to detect fraud
The complaint was submitted by Atienza to his lawyer Vicente • Wrongful certification of financial statements
Evangelista a member of the Philippine Bar. It was alleged
that he was remiss in attending to her case with Manila Legal Liability Of A Certified Public Accountant
Fiscals Office and having been retained and paid for his • CPAs have common law liability and statutory law liability.
services but he denied in any imputation of lack of due Common law liability arises from negligence, breach of
diligence in performing the legal services required of him. He contract, and fraud. Statutory law liability is the obligation
asserted in a manner that he had always conducted himself in that comes from a certain statute or a law, which is applied,
a manner expected as a lawyer. That there was a to society. Recoveries from these liabilities vary by their
recommendation of the city fiscal’s office that the case he was source or “theory”.
handled be dropped for insuffieciency of evidence. This case
6
Some of these theories are: assess the fault and apply the correct percentage
• Privity: CPAs and their clients enter into a contract of fault to the parties involved. This is called
with an agreement to perform certain services. comparative negligence
Liability occurs when there is a breach of contract. • Liability to third parties: Not all suits brought to
This applies to the CPA if they don’t perform what an auditor are from a direct client. Third parties
they stated in the engagement letter and the client can also sue an auditor for fraud, in which case a
suffers damages. contract (privity) is necessary. In order for a third
party to prevail in a case, there are a number of
things they must prove. First, the third party must
• Professional negligence: Negligence may be
prove that the auditor had a duty to exercise due
viewed as “failure to exercise due professional care".
care. Second, the third party must prove that the
Both clients and third parties can sue CPAs for the
auditor breached that duty knowingly. Third, the
tort of negligence, which is a wrongful act, injury, or
third party must prove that the auditor's breach
damage for which a civil action can be brought.
was the direct reason for the loss. Finally, the third
Negligence can be referred to as ordinary negligence
party must prove that they suffered an actual loss.
and gross negligence. Ordinary negligence is defined
• Ultramares(known user) approach.
as failure of duty in accordance with applicable
standards, and gross negligence is the lack of
concern for the likelihood that injuries will result. • In order for the court to decide if the auditor's duty
actually extended to the third party, for ordinary
negligence, there are four legal approaches each
• Fraud: Fraud is defined to be a misrepresentation of
state could follow. First is the Privity approach,
a material fact by a person who is aware of his or
which states the auditor is liable to a third party if
her actions, with the intention of misleading the
an existence of a contract is in existence.This
other party with the other party injured as a result.
approach was established in Ultramares
Corporation v. Toucheand is the most limiting
• Statutory liability: CPAs have statutory liability approach in respect to scope.Ultramares occurred
under both federal and state securities laws. in 1933 where the defendant CPA distributed an
Statutory liability provides cover for defense costs, unqualified opinion on the balance sheet of a
fines and penalties charged against the firm. Under company. In addition to the CPAs estimations,
statutory law, an auditor can be held civilly or Ultramares wrote out several loans to the company
criminally liable. shortly before the company declared bankruptcy.
Ultramares sued the CPA for ordinary negligence.
• Liability to clients:CPAs have an obligation to their The New York Court of Appeals ruled that CPAs are
clients to exercise due professional care. With an held accountable for ordinary negligence to their
engagement letter, it provides the client and other clients and third parties who identify themselves as
third parties with rights of recovery. Therefore, if the users of the CPAs reports.
CPAs are not performing within the agreement set
forth in the contract this will be considered a breach • The "near privity" approach was established in
of contract. The clients may also claim negligence Credit Alliance Corp. v. Arthur Andersen &
against the CPAs if the work was performed but Company.This approach states that the auditor has
contained errors or was not done professionally. This liability under ordinary negligence if the third party
is considered a tort action. is known to be using the financial statements and
there has been some sort of direct communication
• In order to recover from an auditor under between the two parties.An example could be the
common law, the client must prove: auditor directly giving a report to the bank that will
be providing the loan for an actual client
1. Duty of care
2. Breach of Duty • Restatement of Torts (foreseen user) approach.
3. Losses
4. Causation
• The "foreseen" or "Restatement Standard"
approach was established by the American Law
• CPAs may defend against a breach of contract if they Institute’s (ALI) Second Restatement of Law of
can prove that the client’s loss occurred because of Torts. With this approach the auditor is liable to all
factors other than negligence by the auditors. If the third parties in which their reliance is foreseen
auditor proves the loss resulted from causes other even if the auditor doesn't know the third party.
than the auditor’s negligence, a client may be This approach came about due to Rusch Factors,
accused of contributory negligence. If a state follows Inc. v. Levin. In this case, the CPA was found
the doctrine of contributory negligence, the auditor accountable for ordinary negligence to the third
may eliminate their liability to the client based on party who had not been specifically identified but
contributory negligence by the client. Many states do the CPA was aware that the financial statements
not follow this doctrine.Most states permit a jury to were to be used by this party.
7
 both the company and its auditors may be held liable.
• Rosenblum(foreseeable user) approach Those who initially purchase a security offered for sale are
the only ones protected by the 1933 Act. These security
purchasers, known as the plaintiffs, only need to prove a
• The "reasonably foreseeable" approach which was
loss was constant and that the registration statement was
created due to Rosenblum v. Adler. This method is
misleading. They do not need to prove that they relied upon
very liberal and broad in terms of scope, unlike the
the registration or that the auditors were negligent. In
privity approach. This system holds an auditor liable
order for an auditor to avoid liability, they must provide
to all third parties that rely on financial statements.
proof that the audit was performed with due diligence, the
plaintiff’s losses were not caused by misstated financial
Criminal liability under the Securities Acts: statements, the plaintiffs knew of the misstatement at the
time the securities were purchased, or the statute of
• The Continental Vending case (also known as United limitations had expired (one year after the discovery of the
States v. Simon)has set the precedent of severe charges for misstatement, but no more than three years after the
accountants. In this case, the U.S. court of appeals security was offered to the public).[ The due diligence
convicted three CPAs of gross negligence. Although the CPAs defense is the defense that most auditors raise, even
had proof to establish that they complied with U.S. generally though it is difficult for auditors to prove their innocence.
accepted accounting principles and the U.S. generally The standing precedent on interpretation of due diligence is
accepted accounting standards, Mano states that the district Escott v. BarChris Construction Corporation, decided in
court judge instructed the jury that mere compliance with 1968.
professional accounting standards was not a complete
defense. This led to the conviction of the three CPAs, who • The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires all
were later pardoned by President Richard Nixon. companies under SEC jurisdiction to file an annual audit and
have quarterly review of financial statements. While the
• As the accounting standards and principles evolve, it is 1933 Act creates liability only to those investors involved in
essential for those in regulation, of litigation and in the the initial distribution of public offerings, the 1934 Act
accounting profession to be aware of the principles and the increases that responsibility to subsequent purchasers and
potential risks affiliated with the system concerning liability. sellers of the stock. This act provides absolute protection to
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) along with original and subsequent purchasers and sellers of securities.
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board(PCAOB) These plaintiffs must prove that:
have implemented consequences for those who are involved 1) there was a substantial loss,
in auditing fraud and any other illegal or unethical behavior 2) the financial statements were misleading, and
in the field. In 1995, the SEC established the Private 3) they relied upon the financial statements.
Securities Litigation Reform Actwhich in essence mandated
auditors to have even stricter guidelines as they pertains to Q: Can you sue your accountant for negligence?
any fraudulent or misleading behavior of their clients. This A: YES If you have suffered a financial loss due to your
act simply states that the auditors must promptly report any accountant's advice you may be entitled to claim
illegal acts of its clients to the company’s board of directors compensation from them. ... If the advice given falls below
and if severe enough, to the SEC. According to the the standard you should reasonably expect from an
guidelines of this Act, auditors are relieved of sanctions if accountant then you may be able to sue your accountant
they report required information about clients to the SEC in for negligence.
a timely manner.
Q: What happen if your accountant makes a mistake?
Statutory Liability A: If the IRS is charging you a penalty for a tax mistake,
•The definition of statutory law is written law, created by even if that mistake was made by your preparer, pay it. ...
state or federal legislative bodies. Lawsuits brought against If it doesn't receive its payment, you are the one who will
auditors based on statutory provisions differ from those under face additional financial penalties. If your tax preparer
common law. While common law can vary from state to state refuses to pay for its mistake, send a check to the IRS.
and has the ability to evolve or change, statutory law is
constrained to a greater degree by the underlying law. The
Q: Are tax preparers responsible for the mistakes?
two most important laws relating to auditors’ liability are the
A: As the taxpayer, you are primarily responsible for any
Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of
errors on your tax return. ... However, reputable tax
1934. CPAs must also be concerned with the application of
preparers usually correct their mathematical errors without
the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
charge. They also pay any IRS penalty or interest caused by
Act(RICO) and with each state’s blue sky laws (which regulate
determination of the correct tax after the due date.
the issuance and trading of securities within a certain state).

• The Securities Act of 1933 requires a company to register • As a business owner, you are not without a remedy when
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In order your CPA fails to file your business's tax return. You legally
to complete registration, the company must include audited can seek compensation from the CPA for money you lost
financial statements and numerous other disclosures. If the due to her negligence. ... You possess the legal right to sue
registration statement was to be found materially misstated,
8
your CPA for malpractice in order to obtain compensation for on all rights: that in their exercise, the norms of
your losses. human conduct set forth in Article 19 must be
observed. A right, though by itself legal because
recognized or granted by law as such, may
Q: How long a tax preparer required to keep records?
nevertheless become the source of some illegality.
A: Even if your client keeps a copy of his tax returns, you're
When a right is exercised in a manner which does
still obligated to retain his tax records. Internal Revenue
not conform with the norms enshrined in Article 19
Service Bulletin 2012-11 states that tax preparers must
and results in damage to another, a legal wrong is
maintain tax returns, along with supporting tax
thereby committed for which the wrongdoer must
documentation, for a minimum of three years.
be held responsible.
HUMAN RELATION RELATIONS: INTENTIONAL TORTS
 Although the requirements of each provision is
Reason for Chapter on Human Relations
different, these three (3) articles are all related to
 Chapter 2 of the Preliminary Title of the New Civil
each other. As the eminent Civilist Senator Arturo
Code entitled “Human Relations” is not found in Old
Tolentino puts it: “With this article (Article 21),
Civil Code.
combined with articles 19 and 20, the scope of our
law on civil wrongs has been very greatly
 “Chapter 2 of the Preliminary Title is devoted to
broadened; it has become much more supple and
“Human Relations.” Therein are formulated some
adaptable than the Anglo-American law on torts. It
basic principles that are to be observed for the
is now difficult to conceive of any malevolent
rightful relationship between human beings and for
exercise of a right which could not be checked by
the stability of the social order. The present Civil
the application of these articles.”
Code merely states the effects of the law, but fails to
draw the spirit of the law. This chapter is designed to
Case: Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation vs.
indicate certain norms that spring from the fountain
Court of Appeals, 176 SCRA 778 [1989]
of good conscience. These guides for human conduct
should run as golden threads through society, to the
end that law may approach its supreme ideal, which Ruling: There is however, no hard and fast rule which can
is the sway and dominance of justice “ be applied to determine whether or not the principle of
abuse of rights may be invoked. The question of whether or
CATCH ALL PROVISIONS : CONCEPTS not the principle of abuse of rights has been violated,
 The expanded coverage of tort finds resonance in resulting in damages under Articles 20 and 21 or other
Articles 19, 20 and 21 of the New Civil Code. applicable provision of law, depends on the circumstances
 Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his of each case.
rights and in the performance of his duties, act with
justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty The Supreme Court offered the following explanation as to
and good faith. the nature of what Judge Sanco calls “catch-all” provisions:
 Article 19, is believed to be a mere declaration of
principles which is being implemented by other  This article (Art. 19), known to contain what is
provisions commonly referred to as the principle of abuse of
 Art. 20. Every person who, contrary to law, willfully rights, sets certain standards which must be
or negligently causes damage to another, shall observed not only in the exercise of one’s rights
indemnify the latter for the same. but also in the performance of one’s duties. These
 The Code Commission expressed the view that the standards are the following: to act with justice; to
rule under Article 20 “pervades the entire legal give everyone his due; and to observe honesty and
system, and renders it impossible that a person who good faith. The law, therefore, recognizes a
suffers damage because an- other has violated some primordial limitation on all rights; that in their
legal provision, should find himself without relief.” exercise, the norms of human conduct set forth in
 Article 19 declares a principle of law and Article 21 Article 19 must be observed. A right, though by
gives flesh to its provisions. itself legal because recognized or granted by law
as such, may nevertheless become the source of
The Supreme Court explained the significance of the some illegality. When a light is exercised in a
said articles in this wise: manner which does not conform with the norms
enshrined in Article 19 and results in damage to
 Article 19, known to contain what is commonly another, a legal wrong is thereby committed for
referred to as the principle of abuse of rights, sets which the wrongdoer must be held responsible. But
certain standards which may be observed not only in while Article 19 lays down a rule of conduct for the
the exercise of one’s rights but also in the government of human relations and for the
performance of one’s duties. These standards are the maintenance of social order, it does not provide a
following: to act with justice; to give everyone his remedy for its violation. Generally, an action for
due; and to observe honesty and good faith. The damages under either Article 20 or Article 21
law, therefore, recognizes the primordial limitation would be proper.

9
 Art. 218 of the Family Code states:
“The school, its administrators and teachers, or the
Case: PNB vs. CA, G.R. No. L-27155, May 18, 1978,
individual, entity or institution engaged in child care shall
have special parental authority and responsibility over the
• This article (Art. 21), adopted to remedy the “countless minor child while under their supervision, instruction of
gaps in the statutes, which leave so many victims of moral custody.”
wrongs helpless, even though they have actually suffered
material and moral injury” Professional Standard of Care is needed for those engaged
in Educational Institution. Failure to Apply the Professional
• “Thus at one stroke, the legislator, if the foregoing rule is Standard of Care can result in school’s negligence.
approved, would vouchsafe adequate legal remedy for that
untold number of moral wrongs which it is impossible for Case: St. Joseph College, Et. Al. vs. Jayson Miranda,
human foresight to provide for specifically in the statutes.” GR. No. 182353, June 29, 2010

• It should be emphasized, however, that an action can only Facts: In the afternoon inside St. Joseph Colleges (SJC)
prosper when damage, material or otherwise, was suffered by premises, the class to which 12 year-old Jayson Miranda
the plaintiff. An action based on Articles 19, 20 and 21 will be (Jayson) belonged was conducting a science experiment
dismissed if the plaintiff merely seeks “recognition. about fusion of sulphur powder and iron fillings under the
Case: Enrique J. L. Ruiz, et al. vs. The Secretary of tutelage of Rosalinda Tabugo (Tabugo), a teacher and
National Defense, G.R. No. L-15526, December 28, employee of SJC. Tabugo left her class while it was doing
1963 the experiment without having adequately secured it from
any untoward incident or occurrence. In the middle of the
experiment, Jayson being the assistant leader of one group
Ruling: A complaint will be dismissed if the plaintiffs filed an
in the class, checked the result of the experiment by
action to be merely recognized as architects of a building.
looking into the test tube with magnifying glass. The
compound in the test tube spurted out several particles of
Case: Grand Union Supermarket vs. Jose J. Espino, Jr.,
which hit Jayson’s eye and the different parts of the bodies
G.R. No. L-48250, December 28, 1979
of some of his group mates. The parents of Jayson filed a
complaint for damages.
• Interestingly, the Supreme Court likewise ruled that the
defend- ant may likewise be guilty of tort under Articles 19
Ruling of RTC: Judgment was rendered in favor of Jayson
and 21 even if he acted in good faith.
and against SJC.

• In those cases, liability to pay moral damages may not be

Ruling of CA: The Judgment of RTC was affirmed in toto.
imposed on the defendant who acted in good faith.

NEGLIGENCE OF SELECTED BUSINESS ORGANIZATION Issues:

1st: Whether or not Jayson contributory negligence of
“Negligence is want of care required by the circumstances. It peeking into the test tube was in fact the proximate cause
is a relative or comparative, not an absolute term, and its of his injury for which SJC should not be held liable?
application depends upon the situation of the parties, and the 2nd: Whether or not SJC is liable for damages?
degree of care and vigilance which the circumstances
reasonably impose. Where the danger is great, a high degree Held: for the 1st issue:
of care is necessary.” (Makati Shangri-la Hotel and Resort,
Inc vs. Ellen Johanne Harper, et. al., G.R. No. 189998, August In this case, SJC failed to show that the negligence of
29, 2012) Jayson was the proximate cause of the latter’s injury. The
immediate cause of the accident was not the negligence of
NEGLIGENCE IN SCHOOL INSTITUTIONS AND Jayson when he curiously looked into the test tube when
ADMINISTRATIONS the chemicals suddenly exploded which caused his injury,
but the sudden and unexpected explosion of the chemicals
Art. 2180 of the Civil Code states: independent of any intervening cause.
“The obligation imposed by Art. 2176 is demandable not only
for one’s own acts or omissions, but also for those persons for The proximate cause of Jayson’s injury was the concurrent
whom one is responsible. x x x Lastly, teachers or heads of failure of petitioners to prevent the foreseeable mishap that
establishments of arts and trades shall be liable for damages occurred during the conduct of the science experiment.
caused by their pupils and students or apprentices, so long as Art. 218 of the Family Code, in relation to Article 2180 of
the remain in their custody. The responsibility treated of in the Civil Code, bestows special parental authority on the
this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned following persons with the corresponding obligations.
prove that they observed all the diligence of a good father of
a family to prevent damage.”

10
SJC could have prevented the mishap if they exercised a party to it, is not bound by the same under the principle of
higher degree of care, caution and foresight required of them. relativity of contracts; and d) FEU exercised due diligence in
selecting Galaxy as the agency which would provide
Held for the 2nd Issue: security services within the respondent FEU.

SC ruled that SJC’s negligence and failure to exercise the

Issue no. 1: Whether or not there is a contractual
requisite degree of care and caution is demonstrated by the
obligation between Saludaga and FEU.
following:

1. SJC did not take affirmative steps to avert damages Held: It is undisputed that petitioner was enrolled as a
and injury to its students although it had full sophomore law student in respondent FEU. As such, there
information on the nature of dangerous science was created a contractual obligation between the two
experiments conducted by the students during class; parties. On petitioner’s part, he was obliged to comply with
2. SJC did not install safety measures to protect the the rules and regulations o the school. On the other hand,
students who conducted experiments in class; respondent FEU, as a learning institution is mandated to
3. SJC did not provide protective gears and devices, impart knowledge and equip its students with the necessary
specifically goggles, to shield students from expected skills to pursue higher education or a profession. At the
risks and dangers; and same time, it is obliged to ensure and take adequate steps
4. The assigned teacher was not inside the classroom to maintain peace and order within the campus.
the whole time her class conducted experiment,
specifically, when the accident involving Jayson Issue no. 2: Whether or not FEU is guilty of culpa
occurred. contractual?
5.
This neglect in preventing a foreseeable injury and damage
equates to neglect in exercising the utmost degree of Held: It is settled that in culpa contractual, the mere proof
diligence required of school, its administrators and teachers, of the existence of the contract and the failure of its
and, ultimately, was the proximate cause of the damage and compliance justify, prima facie, a corresponding right of
injury to Jayson. relief. Here, petitioner was shot inside the campus by no
less the security guard who was hired to maintain peace
Case: Joseph Saludaga vs. Far Eastern University, et. al. and secure the premises, there is prima facie showing that
G.R. No. 179337, April 30, 2008 respondents failed to comply with its obligation to provide a
safe and secure environment to its students. Also,
respondents failed to prove that they ensured tha the
Facts: guards assigned in the campus met the requirements
Petitioner Joseph Saludaga was a sophomore law student of
stipulated in the Security Service Agreement. No evidence
respondent Far Eastern University (FEU) when he as shot by
as to the qualifications of Rosete as security guard was
Alejandro Rosete (Rosete), one of the security guards on duty presented. Respondents also failed to show that they
at the school premises. undertook steps to ascertain and confirm that the security
guards assigned to them actually possess the qualifications
Petitioner thereafter filed a complaint for damages against
required in the Security Service Agreement.
respondents on the ground that they breached their obligation
to provide students with a safe and secure environment and
an atmosphere conducive to learning. Respondents, in turn, Issue no. 3: Whether or not the petitioner is entitled to
filed a third-party complaint against Galaxy Dev’t. & Mgt. indemnification for damages.
Corp. (Galaxy), the agency contracted by respondent FEU to
provide security services within its premises to indemnify Held: Petitioner is entitled to actual damages, moral
them for whatever would be adjudged in favor of petitioner. damages, temperate damages, attorney’s fees, and
litigation expenses. Art. 1170 of the Civil Code provides that
RTC: FEU and its president as ordered to pay jointly and those who are negligent in the performance of their
severally Saludaga damages. Galaxy and its President was obligations are liable for damages. Accordingly, for breach
ordered to indemnify jointly and severally FEU for such of contract due to negligence in providing a safe learning
amount. environment, FEU is liable to petitioner for damages.

CA: Dismissed, ruling that: a) the incident was a fortuitous Issue no. 4: Whether or not the FEU President himself is
event; b) the respondents are not liable for damages of the vicariously liable?
injury suffered by the petitioner from the hands of their own
security guard in violation of their built-in contractual
Held: FEU President cannot be held liable for damages
obligation to petitioner, being their law student at the time, to
under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code because respondents are
provide him with a safe and secure educational environment;
not employers of Rosete. The latter was employed by
c) that Rosete, who shot petitioner, was not FEU’s employee
Galaxy. The instructions issued by respondent’s Security
by virtue of the contract for security services between Galaxy
Consultant to Galaxy and its security guards are ordinarily
and FEU, notwithstanding the fact that petitioner, not being a
no more than requests commonly envisaged in the contract
11
for services entered into by a principal and a security agency. regulations. Institutions of learning must also meet the
implicit or “built-in” obligation of providing their students
with an atmosphere that promotes or assists in attaining its
Issue no. 5: Whether or not Galaxy and its President were
primary undertaking of imparting knowledge. Necessarily,
liable for damages?
the school must ensure that adequate steps are taken to
maintain peace and order within the campus premises and
Held: For the acts of negligence and for having supplied to prevent the breakdown thereof. A perusal of Art. 2176
respondent FEU with an unqualified security guard, which shows that obligations arising from quasi-delicts or tort,
resulted to the latter’s breach of obligation to petitioner, it is also known as extra-contractual obligations, arise only
proper to old Galaxy liable to respondent FEU for such between parties not otherwise bound by contract, whether
damages equivalent to the above-mentioned amounts express or implied. However, this impression has not
awarded to petitioner. Also, unlike FEU president, SC deemed prevented this Court from determining the existence of a
Galaxy President to be solidarily liable with Galaxy for being tort even when there obtains a contract. Article 21 of the
grossly negligent in directing the affairs of the security Civil Code provides: “Any person who wilfully causes loss or
agency. It was the Galaxy President who assured petitioner injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals,
that his medical expenses will be shouldered by Galaxy, but good custom or public policy shall compensate the latter for
said representations were not fulfilled because they presumed the damage.” It can be concluded that should the act which
that petitioner and his family were no longer interested in breaches a contract be done in bad faith and be violative of
filing a formal complaint against them. Article 21, then there is a cause to view the act as
constituting a quasi-delict.
Philippine School of Business Administration, et. al. vs.
CA G.R. no. 84698, February 4, 1992
In the case at bar, there is, as yet, no finding that the
contract between the school and Bautista had been
Facts: breached thru the former’s negligence in providing proper
security measures. Even if there be a finding of negligence,
A stabbing incident which caused the death of Carlitos the same could give rise generally to a breach of
Bautista while on the 2nd floor premises of the Philippine contractual obligation only. In other words, a contractual
School of Business Administration (PSBA) prompted the relation is a condition sine qua non to the school’s liability.
parents of the deceased to file suit for damages against PSBA The negligence of the school cannot exist independently of
and its corporate officers. At the time of his death, Carlitos the contract, unless the negligence occurs under the
was enrolled in the third year commerce course at PSBA. It circumstances set out in Article 21 of the Civil Code. Should
was established that the assailants were not members of the this be the case, the school may still avoid liability by
school’s academic community but were elements from proving that the breach of its contractual obligation to the
outside the school. PSBA filed a motion to dismiss stating that students was not due to its negligence, here statutorily
since they are presumably sued under Article 2180 of the Civil defined to be the omission of that degree of diligence which
Code, the complaint sates no cause of action against them. is required by the nature of the obligation and
The trial court did not grant the motion to dismiss. Petitioner corresponding to the circumstances of persons, time and
raised the same to the appellate court, which affirmed the place.
ruling of the lower court. SC denied the petition and ordered the court of origin to
continue proceedings consistent with this ruling of the
Issue: Whether or not PSBA is exculpated from liability? court.
Held: Art. 2180, in conjunction with Art. 2176 of the Civil
Code, establishes the rule of in loco parentis. It had been
stressed that Art. 2180 plainly provides that the damages
should have been caused or inflicted by pupils or students of
the educational institution sought to be held liable for the acts
of its pupils or students while in its custody. This material
situation does not exist in the present case as the assailants
were not students of the PSBA for whose acts the school NEGLIGENCE OF BANKS
could be made liable. However, it does not necessarily follow
that petitioners are exculpated from liability. When an • Diligence required of banks is more than that of a Roman
academic institution accepts students for enrollment, there is pater familias or a good father of a family. The highest
established a contract between them, resulting in bilateral degree of diligence is expected.
obligations which both parties are bound to comply with. For
its part, the school undertakes to provide the student with an
Case: Philippine National Bank vs. Sps. Cheah Chee
education that would presumably suffice to equip him with
Chong, et. Al. GR. No. 170865, April 25, 2012
the necessary tools and skills to pursue higher education or
profession.
Facts:
On the other hand, the student covenants to abide by the
school’s academic requirements and observe its rules and
12
Ofelia Cheah (Ofelia) and her friend Adelina Guarin (Adelina) its own banking policy amounts to gross negligence, which
were having a conversation in the latters office when Adelinas the law defines as negligence characterized by the want of
friend, Filipina Tuazon, approached her to ask is she could even slight care, acting or omitting to act in a situation
have Filipinas check cleared and encashed for a service fee of where there is duty to act, not inadvertently but wilfully and
2.5 %. Because Adelina does not have a dollar account in intentionally with a conscious indifference to consequences
which to deposit the check, she asked Ofelia if she could in so far as other persons may be affected.
accommodate Filipinas request since she has joint dollar
savings account with her Malaysian husband Cheah Chee Case: Philippine National Bank vs. FF. Cruz and Co.
Chong(Chong) with PNB Buendia Branch. Ofelia agreed, and Inc.
on the same day they went to PNB Buendia Branch and G.R. No. 173259, July 25, 2011
deposited Filipinas check. PNB then sent it for clearing
through its correspondent bank, Philadelphia National Bank
Facts: Respondent FF. Cruz & Co. Inc (FFCCI) opened
(Philadelphia). Five days late, PNB received a credit advice
savings/current or so-called combo account with petitioner
from Philadelphia that the proceeds of the subject check had
Philippine Savings Bank (PNB) as its Timog Ave. Branch. Its
been temporarily credited to PNB account. Without waiting for
president Felipe Cruz (Felipe) and Secretary Angelita A.
the 15 days clearing, PNB called up Ofelia to inform that her
Cruz (Angelita) were named signatories for the said
check had already been cleared. The following day after Ofelia
accounts. The said signatories left for and returned from the
got the information, withdraw the amount and the proceeds
United State of America. While they were thus out of the
were given to Filipina.
country, applications for cashiers and managers checks
bearing Felipe’s signature were presented to and both
PNB received SWIFT messages from the correspondent bank
approved by the PNB. The first was payable to a certain
informing the return of the subject check for insufficient
Gene B. Sangalang and the other one was payabe to one
funds. Ofelia was able to return some amounts which she was
Paul Bautista. The amounts of these checks were then
able to recover from the beneficiaries but was not able to
debited by the PNB against the combo account of FFCCI.
raise the total amount of the check which is $300,000. PNB
sent a demand to Sps. Cheah for the return of the amount
and froze their peso and dollar deposits. When Angelita returned to the country, she had occasioned
to examine the PNB statements of account of FFCCI and
RTC ruled in PNB’s favor and held that Sps. Cheah were guilty noticed that there were deductions. Claiming that these
of contributory negligence, because Ofelia trusted a friends were unauthorized and fraudently made, FFCCI request PNB
friend whom she did not know and considering the amount of to credit back and restore t its account the value of the
the check made payabe to cash, and showed lack of vigilance checks. PNB refused, nad thus FFCCI filed a suit for
in her dealings. damages against PNB and its own accountant Aurea
Caparas (Caparas).
CA recognized the Sps. Cheah as victims of a scam who
nevertheless have to suffer the consequences of Ofelias lack The trial court ruled the FFCCI was guilty of negligence for
of care and prudence in immediately trusting a stranger, the waiving the two-signature requirement in transactions
appellate court did not hold PNB scot free as both parties involving the subject combo account and was negligent in
were equally negligent. not immediately informing PNB of the fraud. The PNB was
likewise negligent in not calling or personally verifying from
Issue: Whether or not PNB is liable? the authorized signatories the legitimacy of the subject
withdrawals considering that they were in huge amounts,
Held: PNB’s act of releasing the proceeds of the check prior PNB has the last clear chance to prevent the unauthorized
to the lapse of the 15-day clearing period was the proximate debits from FFCCI’s combo account. The lower court
cause of the loss. Proximate cause is that cause, which, in declared that PNB should bear the whole loss.
natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury and without which the The CA affirmed the decision with modification that PNB
result would not have occurred. While PNB highlights Ofelias shall pay only 60% of the actual damages awarded by the
fault in accommodating a strangers check and depositing it to trial court while the remaining 40% shall be borne by
the bank, it remains mum in its release of the proceeds FFCCI.
thereof without exhausting the 15-day clearing period, an act
which contravened established banking rules and practice.
PNB’s disregard of its preventive and protective measure Issue: Whether or not PNB is guilty of negligence?
against the possibility of being victimized by bad checks had
brought upon itself the injury of losing a significant amount of Held: PNB is guilty of negligence.
money.
PNB failed to make the proper verification because the
It bears stressing that the diligence required of banks is more applications for the managers check do not bear the
than that of a Roman pater familias or a good father of a signature of the bank verifier. PNB did not present the
family. The highest degree of diligence is expected. PNB account analyst to explain his or her failure to sign the box
miserably failed to do its duty of exercising extraordinary for signature and balance verification of the subject
diligence and reasonable business prudence. The disregard of
13
applications for managers check, thus casting doubt as to Issue: Whether or not Solidbank Corporation is liable for
whether he or she did indeed verify the signatures thereon. damages?
The SC find no reversible error in the finding of the appellate Held: It is undisputed that the subject check was
court that PNB was negligent in the handling of FFCCI’s adequately funded, but that petitioner wrongfully
combo account, specifically, with respect to PNB’s failure to dishonored it. Respondent Carmen was able to prove that
detect the forgeries in the subject applications for managers petitioners wrongful dishonor of her check was the
check which could have prevented the loss. As often ruled, proximate cause of her embarrassment and humiliation in
the banking business is impressed with public trust. A higher her workplace, in her own home, and in the church where
degree of diligence is imposed on banks relative to the she served as deaconess. The CA was in agreement with
handling of their affairs than that of an ordinary business the trial court in ruling that her injury arose from the gross
enterprise. Thus, the degree of responsibility, care and negligence of petitioner in dishonoring her well-funded
trustworthiness expected of their officials and employees is check. Treating Carmen’s account as closed, merely
far greater than those of ordinary officers and employees in because the ledger could not be found was a reckless act
other enterprise. In the case at bar, PNB failed to met the that could not simply be brushed off as an honest mistake.
high standard of diligence required by the circumstances to We have repeatedly emphasized that the banking industry
prevent the fraud. is impressed with public interest. Consequently, the highest
degree of diligence is expected, and high standards of
The SC denied the petition and affirmed the decision of the integrity and performance are even required of it. By the
CA. nature of its functions, a bank is under obligation to treat
the accounts of its depositors with meticulous care and
Case: Solidbank Corporation vs. Sps. Teodulfo & always to have in mind the fiduciary nature of its
Carmen Arrieta G.R. No. 152720, February 17, 2005 relationship with them. Article 21 of the Civil Code states
that any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another
Facts: Carmen Arrieta (Carmen) is a bank depositor of in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or
Solidbank Corporation. ON March 1990, Carmen issued a public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.
check in the amount of PhP330.00 in the name of Lopues Further, Article 2219 provides for the recovery or moral
Dept. Store in payment for her purchases from said store. damages for acts referred to in the aforementioned Article
When the check was deposited by the store to its account, the 21.
same was dishonored due to Account Closed despite the fact
that at the time the check was presented for payment, FIREARM RELATED NEGLIGENCE
Carmen’s checking account was still active and backed up by
a deposit of PhP 1,275.20. As consequence of the checks Art. 2176 of the Civil Code states:
dishonor, Lopues Dept. Store sent a demand letter to Carmen “Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another,
threatening her with criminal prosecution unless she there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the
redeemed the check within 5 days. To avoid criminal damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-
prosecution, Carmen paid PhP330.00 in cash to the store, existing contractual relation between parties, is called
plus a surcharge of PhP33.00 for the bouncing check or a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this
total of PhP 363.00. Chapter”

The bank in its answer, claimed that Carmen failed to A higher degree of care is required of someone who has in
maintain the required balance of at least PhP1,000.00 on any his possession or under his control an instrumentality
day of the month, an did not handle her account in a manner extremely dangerous in character, such as dangerous
satisfactory to the bank. Her violations of the general terms weapons or substance.
and conditions governing the establishment and operation of
a current account, Carmen’s account was recommended for Alfredo P. Pacis, et. Al. vs. Jerome Jovanne Morales
closure. In any event, the bank claimed good faith in G.R.no. 169467, February 25, 2010
declaring her account closed since one of the clerks, who
substituted for the regular clerk, committed an honest
Facts: Petitioner filed with the trial court a civil case for
mistake when he thought that the subject account was
damages against respondent Morales. Petitioners are the
already closed when the ledger containing the said account
parents of Alfred Pacis a 17 year old student who died in a
could not be found.
shooting incident inside the Top Gun Firearms and
Ammunitions Store in Baguio City. Morales is the owner of
The trial court rendered its decision that Solidbank the gun store.
Corporation was grossly negligent in failing to check whether
or not Carmen’s account was still open and viable at the time
On the fateful day, Alfred was in the gun store, with
the transaction was made.
Matibag and Herbolario as sales agents and caretakers of
the store while owner Morales was I Manila. The gun which
The CA affirmed the decision of the lower court. killed Alfred is a gun owned by a store customer which was
left with the caretakers. It appears that the caretakers took
the gun from the drawer and placed it on top of a able.

14
Attracted by the sight of the gun, the young Alfred got hold of ensuring first that it was not loaded. Furthermore, it was
the same. Matibag asked Alfred to return the gun. The latter not shown in this case whether respondent had a License to
followed and handed the gun to Matibag. It went off, the Repair which authorizes him to repair defective firearms to
bullet hitting the young Alfred in the head. restore its original composition or enhance or upgrade
firearms.
A criminal case for homicide was filed against Matibag.
Matibag , however, was acquitted of the charge against him NEGLIGENCE OF RESORT & SWIMMING POOL
because of the exempting circumstance of “accident” under OPERATOR
Art. 12 par. 4 of the Revised Penal Code. By agreement of the • The “reasonable care” that it must exercise for the safety
parties, the evidence adduced in the criminal case for and comfort of its guests should be commensurate with the
homicide against Matibag was reproduced and adopted by grade and quality of the accommodation it offers.
them as part of their evidence in the instant case. The trial
court rendered its decision in favor of petitioners, ordering the
• “The rule is well settled that the owners of resorts to
defendant to pay plaintiff indemnity for the death of Alfred,
which people generally are expressly of by implication
actual damages for the hospitalization and burial, expenses
invited are legally bound to exercise ordinary care and
incurred by the plaintiffs, compensatory damages, and some
prudence in the management and maintenance of such
other damages.
resorts, to the end of making them reasonably safe for
visitors.” (Larkin vs. Saltair Beach Co., 30 Utah 86, 83 Pac.
Respondent appealed to the CA, which reversed the trail
686)
courts Decision and absolved respondent from civil liability
under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code.
• “Although the proprietor of a notatorium is liable for
injuries to a patron, resulting from lack of ordinary care in
Issue: Whether or not Morales was negligent? providing for his safety, without the fault of the patron, he
is not, however, in any sense deemed to be the insurer of
Held: Morales was negligent. the safety of patrons. And the death of a patron within his
premises does not cast upon him the burden of excusing
himself from any presumption of negligence.” (Bertalot vs.
Unlike the subsidiary liability of the employer under Art. 103 Kinnare. 72 iii. App. 52, 22 A.L.R. 635; Flora vs. Bimini
of the Revised Penal Code, the liability of the employer, or Water Co., 161 Cal. 495, 119 Pac. 661)
any person for that matter, under Art. 2176 of the Civil Code
is primary and direct, based on a person’s own negligence. Makati Shangri-la Hotel and Resort, Inc. Vs. Ellen
Johanne Harper, et. al. G.R. No.189998, August 29,
This case involves the accidental discharge of a firearm inside 2012
a gun store. Under PNP circular No. 9, entitled the “Policy on
Firearms and Ammunition Dealership/Repair”, a person who is
in the business of purchasing and selling of firearms and Facts: In the 1st week of November 1999, Christian Harper
ammunition must maintain basic security and safety (Harper) came to Manila on a business trip as Business
requirements of a gun dealer, otherwise his License to Dev’t. Mgr. for Asia of ALSTOM Power Norway AS, an
Operate Dealership will be suspended or cancelled. engineering firm with worldwide operations. He checked in
at Shangri-La Hotel and was billeted at Room 1428. He was
Indeed, a higher degree of care is required of someone who due to check out on November 6, 1999. In the early
has in his possession or under his control an instrumentality morning of that date, however, he was murdered inside his
extremely dangerous in character, such as dangerous hotel room by still unidentified malefactors.
weapons or substance. Such person in possession or control
of dangerous instrumentalities has the duty to take Issue: Whether or not petitioner was liable due to its own
exceptional precautions to prevent any injury being done negligence?
thereby. Unlike the ordinary affairs of life or business which
Held: As the action is predicated on negligence, the
involve little or no risk, a business dealing with dangerous
relevant law is At. 2176 of the Civil Code, which states that
weapons requires the exercise of a higher degree of care.
– “Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another,
As a gun store owner, respondent is presumed to be there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the
knowledgeable about firearms safety and have known never damage done. Such fault of negligence, if there was no-pre-
to keep a loaded weapon in his store to avoid unreasonable existing contractual relation between the parties, is called
risk of harm or injury to others. Respondent has the duty to quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this
ensure that all guns in his store are not loaded. Firearms chapter.” Negligence is defined as the omission to do
should be stored unloaded and separate from ammunition something which a reasonable man, guided by those
when the firearms are not needed for ready-access defensive considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of
use. With more reason, guns accepted by the store for repair human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a
should not be loaded precisely because they are defective and prudent and reasonable man would not do. The Supreme
may cause an accidental discharge such as what happened in Court likewise ruled that negligence is want of care required
this case. Respondent was clearly negligent when he accepted by the circumstances. It is relative or comparative, not an
the gun for repair and placed it inside the drawer without absolute, term and its application depends upon the

15
situation of the parties and the degree of care and vigilance not greater degree of care and responsibility when the lives
which the circumstances reasonably require. and personal safety of their guests are involved. Otherwise,
the hotelkeepers would simply stand idly by as strangers
The test of negligence is objective. We measure the act or have unrestricted access to all the hotel rooms on the
omission of the tortfeasor with a perspective as that of an pretense of being visitors of the guests, without being held
ordinary reasonable person who is similarly situated. Of the liable should anything untoward befall the unwary guests.
witnesses presented, only one with competence to testify on That would be absurd, something that no good law would
the issue of adequacy of inadequacy of security is Co. Rodrigo ever envision.
De Guzman (Rodrigo) who was then the Chief Security Officer
of the hotel for the year 1999. He testified that upon taking Case: Mr. And Mrs. Amador C. Ong vs. Metropolitan
over the job as the chief of the security force of the hotel, he Water District, G.R. No. L-7664, August 29, 1958
made an assessment of the security situation. Rodrigo was
not satisfied with the security set-up and told the hotel
Facts: Plantiff spouses are the parents of Dominador Ong
management of his desire to improve it. He noticed that there
(Dominador), a 14 year old high school student and boy
were few guards in the elevated portion of the hotel where
scout, who drowned in one of the swimming pool that
the rooms were located. Rodrigo also testified that the reason
defendant Metropolitan Water District operates. In the
why the hotel management disapproved his recommendation
afternoon of July 5, 1952, Dominador Ong, and his brother
was that the hotel was not doing so well. It is for this reason
Ruben and Eusebio, went to defendant’s swimming pools.
that the hotel management did not heed the recommendation
This was not the first time that the three brothers had gone
of Rodrigo, no matter how sound the recommendation was,
to said notatorium. After paying the requisite admission fee,
and whether the hotel is fully-booked or not. It was a
they immediately went to one of the small pools where the
business judgment call on the part of the hotel.
water was shallow. Later that afternoon, Dominador told his
brothers that he was going to the locker room in an building
The hotel’s inaction constitutes negligence or want of the
to drink a bottle of coke. Upon hearing this, Ruben and
reasonable care demanded of it in that particular situation. In
Eusebio went to the bigger pool leaving Dominador in the
applying the premises liability rule in the instant case as it is
small pool and so they did not see the latter when he left
applied in some jurisdiction in the United States, it is enough
the pool to get a bottle of coke. In that afternoon, there
that guests are injured while inside the hotel premises to
were two lifeguards on alternate tour of duty in the pool
make the hotelkeeper liable. With great caution should
compound, namely, Manuel Abano (Manuel) and Mario
liability of the hotelkeeper be enforced when a guest died
Villanueva (Mario). Between 4pm-5pm that afternoon, there
inside the hotel premises. It also bears stressing that there
were about 20 bathers inside the pool area and Manuel was
were prior incidents that occurred in the hotel which should
going around the pools to observe the bathers incompliance
have forewarned the hotel management of the security lapses
with the instructions of his chief.
of the hotel. As testified by Rodrigo, “there were ‘minor’
incidents” (loos of items) before the happening of the instant
Between 4:40 to 4:45 pm, some boys who were in the pool
case. These “minor” incidents may be of little significance to
area informed a bather, that somebody was swimming
the hotel, yet relative to the instant case, it speaks volume.
under water for quite a long time. Another boy informed
This should have served as a caveat that the hotel security
lifeguard Manuel of the same happening and Manuel
has lapses. Makati Shangri-La Hotel, to stress, is a five-star
immediately jumped into the big swimming pool and
hotel. The “reasonable care” that it must exercise for the
retrieved the apparently lifeless body of Dominador from
safety and comfort of its guests should be commensurate with
the bottom. The body was placed at the edge of the pool
the grade and quality of the accommodation it offers. If there
and Manuel immediately applied manual artificial
is such thing as “five-star hotel security”, the guest of Makati
respiration. Soon after, male nurse Armando Rule came to
Shangri-La surely deserves just that.
render assistance, followed by sanitary inspector Iluminado
Vicente who after called by phone from the clinic by one of
When one register (as) a guest of a hotel, he makes the
the security guards, boarded a jeep carrying with him the
establishment the guardian of his life and his personal
resuscitator and a medicine kit, and upon arriving he
belongings during his stay. It is a standard procedure of the
injected the boy with camphorated oil. After injection,
management of the hotel to screen visitors who call on their
Vicente left to fetch Dr. Ayuyao while Manuel continued the
guests at their rooms. The murder of Harper could have been
artificial manual respiration, and when he failed to revive
avoided had the security guards of Shangri-La Hotel in Makati
him, they applied resuscitator until the two oxygen tanks
dutifully observed this standard procedure. In so concluding,
were exhausted. Dr. Ayuyao arrived with another
we are reminded of the Supreme Court’s enunciation that the
resuscitator, however the same became of no use because
hotel business like the common carrier’s business is imbued
he found the boy already dead.
with public interest. Catering to the public, hotelkeepers are
bound to provide not only lodging for their guests but also
Issue: Whether or not the death of Dominador can be
security to the persons and belongings of their guests. The
attributed to the negligence of defendant and/or its
twin duty constitutes the essence of the business. Applying by
employees so as to entitle plaintiffs to recover damages?
analogy Art. 2000, Art. 2001 and Art. 2002 of the Civil Code
(all of which concerned the hotelkeeper’s degree of care and
Held: The present action is governed by Art. 2176 in
responsibility as to the personal effects of their guests), we
relation to Art. 2080 of the new Civil Code. The first article
hold that there is much greater reason to apply the same if
16
provides that “whoever by act or omission causes another, the body all efforts at the disposal of appellee had been put
there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the into play in order to bring him back to life, it is clear that
damages done.” Such fault or negligence is called quasi- there is no room for the application of the doctrine now
delict. Under the second article, this obligation is demandable invoked by appellants to impute liability to appellee.
not only for one’s own acts or omissions but also for those
persons of whom one is responsible. Since the present action The last clear chance doctrine can never apply where the
is one for damages founded on culpable negligence, the party charged is required to act instantaneously, and if the
principle to be observed is that the person claiming damages injury cannot be avoided by the application of all means at
has the burden of proving that the damage is caused by the hand after the peril is or should have been discovered; at
fault or negligence of the person from whom the damage is least in cases in which any previous negligence of the party
claimed, or of one of his employees. charged cannot be said to have contributed to the injury.

As found by the trial courts, the appellants failed to prove the Negligence of Building Contractors
negligence of the appellee and/or their employees, and made “Fault or negligence of the obligor consists in his failure to
a conclusion: “The testimony of Ruben Ong and Andres exercise due care and prudence in the performance of the
Hagad, Jr. as to the alleged failure of the lifeguard Abano to obligation as the nature of the obligation so demands,
immediately respond to their call may therefore be taking into account the particulars of each case.”
disregarded because they a belied by their written
statements.” Case: Emerita M. De Guzman vs. Antonio M. Tumolva
G.R. No. 188072, October 19, 2011
On, the other hand, there is sufficient evidence to show that
appellee has taken all necessary precautions to avoid danger Facts: On September 6, 2004, petitioner Emerita M. De
to the loves of its patrons or prevent accident which may Guzman (De Guzman), represented by her Atty.-in-fact,
cause their death. Thus, it has been shown that the Lourdes Rivera and Dhonna Chan, and respondent Antonio
swimming pools or appellee are provided with a ring bouy, Tumolva, doing business under the name and style A.M.
toy roof, towing line, oxygen resuscitator and a first aid Tumolva Engineering Works (the Contractor), entered into a
medicine kit. The bottom of the pools is painted with black Construction Agreement (Agreement) for the construction
colors so as to insure clear visibility. There is on display in a of an orphanage consisting of an administration building,
conspicuous place within the area certain rules and directors/guests house, dining and service building,
regulations governing the use of the pools. Appellee employs childrens dormitory, male staff house, and covered
six lifeguards who are all trained as they had taken course for walkways in Brgy. Pulong Bunga, Purok 4, Silang, Cavite,
that purpose and were issued certificates of proficiency. for a contract price of P15,982,150.39. Incorporated in the
These lifeguards work on schedule prepared by their chief and Agreement was the plan and specifications of the perimeter
arranged in such a way as to have two guards at a time on fence. The Contractor, however, made deviations from the
duty to look after the safety of the bathers. There is a male agreed plan with respect to the perimeter fence of the
nurse and a sanitary inspector with a clinic provided with orphanage.
oxygen resuscitator. And there are security guards who are
available always in case of emergency. On September 6, 2005m after the completion of the
project, De Guzman issued a Certificate of Acceptance. For
Sensing that their former theory as regards the liability of
his part, the Contractor issued a quitclaim acknowledging
appellee may not be of much help, appellants now switch to
the termination of the contract and the full compliance
the theory that even if it be assumed that the deceased is
therewith by De Guzman.
partly to be blamed for the unfortunate incident, still appellee
may be liable under the doctrine of “last clear chance” for the In November 2006, during typhoon Milenyo, a portion of
reason that, having the last opportunity to save the victim, it the perimeter fence collapsed and other portions tilted. De
failed to do so. The doctrine of last clear chance simply means Guzman demand for the restoration of the wall without
that the negligence of a claimant does not preclude a additional cost on her part, or in the alternative, for the
recovery for the negligence of defendant where it appears Contractor to make an offer of a certain amount by way of
that the latter, by exercising reasonable care and prudence, compensation for the damages she sustained. Her demand
might have avoided injurious consequences to claimant was not heeded.
notwithstanding his negligence. Or, “As the doctrine usually is
stated, a person who has the last clear chance or opportunity On February 14, 2008, De Guzman filed a Request for
of avoiding an accident, notwithstanding the negligent acts of Arbitration of the dispute before the Construction Industry
his opponent or the negligence of a third person which is Arbitration Commission (CIAC). She allege that the
imputed to his opponent, is considered in law solely Contractor deliberately defrauded her in the construction of
responsible for the consequences of the accident.” the perimeter fence by under sizing the required column
Since it is not known how minor Ong came into the big rebars, the required hollow blocks, and the distance
swimming pool and it being apparent that he went there between columns. Further the Contractor neither anchored
without any companion in violation of one of the regulations the lenten beams to the columns not placed drains or
of appellee as regards the use of the pools, and it appearing weepholes along the lower walls.
that lifeguard Albano responded to the call for help as soon as
his attention was called to it and immediately after retrieving
17
The Contractor denied liability for the damaged fence
claiming, among others, that its destruction was an act of • Relevant Special laws: Anti-Sexual Harassment Act
God. He admitted making deviations from the plan, but 0f 1995, Data Privacy Act of 2012, Cybercrime
pointed out that the same were made with the knowledge and Prevention Act of 2012, Safe Streets and Public
consent of De Guzman through her representatives, who were Spaces Act of 2017
present during the construction.
Philippine Jurisprudential Experience
The CIAC rendered in favor of De Guzman. • Breach of Promise to Marry
The CA affirmed but with modifications. • Seduction and Sexual Assault
• Desertion by a Spouse
Issue: Is the Contractor liable for damages? • Trespass and Deprivation of Property
• Abortion and Wrongful Death
Held: There is no doubt that De Guzman incurred damages • Illegal Dismissal
as a result of the collapse of the perimeter fence. The • Malicious Prosecution
Contractor is clearly guilty of negligence and, therefore, liable • Abuse of Processes
for the damages caused as correctly found by the CA. • Public Humiliation
Nonetheless, the Court sustains the CIACs conclusion that the
Contractor was negligent in failing to place weepholes on the BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY
collapsed portion of the perimeter fence. Fault or negligence • Generally not actionable.
of the obligor consists in his failure to exercise due care and • Liability arises from other circumstances such as:
prudence in the performance of the obligation as the nature 1.) Financial Damage
of the obligation so demands, taking into account the 2.) Social Humiliation
particulars of each case. It should be emphasized that even if 3.) Moral Seduction
not provided for in the plan, the Contractor himself admitted • Defenses: If there was mutual desire and
the necessity of putting weepholes and claimed to have voluntariness or In Pari Delicto
actually placed them in view of the higher ground elevation of • Constantino v. Mendez
the adjacent lot vis—vis the level ground of construction site. • Gashem Shokat Baksh v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et
Since he was the one who levelled the ground and was, thus, al.
aware that the lowest portion of the adjoining land was • Cecilio Pe v. Alfonso Pe
nearest the perimeter fence, he should have ensured that
sufficient weepholes were placed because water would SEDUCTION AND SEXUAL ASSAULT
naturally flow towards the fence. • Liability attaches if attended by deceit, enticement,
superior power, or abuse of confidence.
However, the Contractor failed to refute Mr. Ramos claim that • Gender is immaterial.
the collapsed portion of the perimeter fence lacked • Overlaps with criminal acts. i.e. Rape, etc.
weepholes. Records also show that the omission of such • C.f. Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995.
weepholes and/or their being plastered over resulted from his
failure to exercise degree of supervision over the work, which DESERTION BY SPOUSE
is the same reason he was unable to discover the deviations • “Refusal to perform wifely duties, denial of
from the plan until the fence collapsed. Hence, the Contractor consortium, and desertion of her husband…”
cannot be relieved from liability therefor. • A willful infliction to injure feelings [Pastor
Tenchaves v. Vicenta F. Escaño]
ACTS CONTRA BONUS MORES/ ACTS CONTRARY GOOD • C.f. with Art. 68 of The Family Code: “The husband
MORALS and wife are obliged to live together,…”
• Exception: Art. 69, par.2 of The Family Code.
Concept and Coverage:
1.) There is an act which is legal. TRESPASS AND DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY
2.) The act is contrary to morals, good custom, public order, • Trespass of Real Property
or public policy; and • Art. 451 of the NCC (Possessor in bad faith with no
3.) The act is done with intent to injure. [Albenson title whatsoever)
Enterprises case] • Art. 448 & 456 of the NCC (Builder in Good Faith
provisions)
• It is usually Res Ipsa Loquitur attended with fraud, • C.f. Good Faith is not a defense in Common Law
oppression, deceit, abuse of power or confidence. Jurisdictions
[Aquino, Torts (2016) p.381] • Accession Continua - not liable but responsible
• Trespass to Personal Property
• Determined on a case-to-case basis. i.e. no act is • Cogeo-Cubao Operators and Drivers Association v.
inherently contra bonus mores Court of Appeals– Right to air grievances should
not disturb public order and infringe on another’s
• Relevant provisions in the Civil Code are: Art. 19, rights.
21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, 35, 2217, 2218,
2219, 2220, inter alia

18
 • Manila Electric Company, et al. v. Court of Appeals - Thus, a person will be protected only when he acts
deprivation of utilities without prior notice is tortious in the legitimate exercise of his right, that is, when he acts
conduct. with prudence and in good faith, not when he acts with
• negligence or abuse.
ABORTION AND WRONGFUL DEATH
• Geluz v. CA The principle of abuse of rights is found under Articles 19,
• Art. 258 & Art. 259 of the Revised Penal Code 20 and 21 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, which states
• that:
ILLEGAL DISMISSAL
• “If the dismissal is done anti-socially or oppressively Art. 19. “Every person must, in the exercise of his rights
…” and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give
Quisaba v. Sta. Ines-Melale Veneer and Plywood, everyone his due and observe honesty and good faith.”
Inc.
• Art. 1701 of the NCC. Art. 20. “Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or
• If the ground for dismissal was fictional [AHSI 1 Phil. negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the
Employee’s Union v. NLRC] latter for the same.”
• Constructive Dismissal is an act contra bonus mores.
• Art. 21. “Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION another in manner that is contrary to morals, good customs
• Albenson Enterprises Corp v. Court of Appeals or public policy shall compensate the latter for the
• 1.) The prosecution ended with Acquittal damage.”
• 2) the prosecutor acted without Probable Cause
• 3)the prosecutor was actuated or impelled by legal • The above articles, depart from the classical theory that
Malice “he who uses a right injures no one”.
• Malice – “… initiated deliberately, knowing that the
charges are false and groundless.” [Mamitua Saber • The modern tendency is to depart from the classical and
v. Court of Appeals] traditional theory, and to grant indemnity for damages in
• “Acquittal requires termination of the action cases where there is an abuse of rights, even when the act
…”[Drilon v. Court of Appeals] is not illicit.
• Prior acquittal or dismissal is within contemplation of
‘acquittal.’
• Control of Prosecutor immaterial To find the existence of abuse of right under the said
• Criminal and Civil actions are the same. Ubi lex non article, the following elements must be present:
distinguit, nec nos distinguirre debemus (1) there is a legal right or duty;
• Damnum Absque Injuria Injury arising from the (2) which is exercised in bad faith;
exercise of a right is non-compensable (3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.

ABUSE OF PROCESS Malice or bad faith is at the core of Article 19 of the Civil
• Gregorio v. Court of Appeals, et al. Code. Malice is bad faith or bad motive.
• A claim for Moral Damages does not ipso facto mean
the action for damages is based on an intentional Bad faith - does not simply connote bad judgment or
tort. simple negligence; it involves a dishonest purpose or some
• Intentional Tort and Quasi-Delict cannot be both moral obloquy and conscious doing of a wrong, a breach of
alleged and claimed in the same case. known duty due to some motives or interest or ill will that
partakes of the nature of fraud.
PUBLIC HUMILIATION
• Slander by Deed Art. 359 of the Revised Penal Code.
Malice - connotes ill will or spite and speaks not in
• Grand Union Supermarket, Inc. v. Jose J. Espino
response to duty. It implies an intention to do ulterior and
• Detained and subjected to verbal abuse in public
unjustifiable harm.
• California Clothing Inc. v. Quiñones
• Maliciously accused through demand letter
• Hotel Nikko Manila Garden v. Reyes Q: What is good faith?
• Told to leave in front of the guests at the party. Good faith - refers to the state of mind which is
manifested by the acts of the individual concerned. It
consists of the intention to abstain from taking an
unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of another.
PRINCIPLE OF ABUSE OF RIGHTS Good faith is presumed. Thus, he who alleges bad faith has
the duty to prove the same.
Rule: A person is not liable for damages resulting from the
exercise of one's right –qui iure suo utitur neminem laedit. Examples of Cases When There is Abuse of Right:
(a) Abuse of right of Creditors.
(b) Abuse of right of Principal.

19
 (c) Abuse of right of Agents. from filing an entirely separate and distinct action for
(d) Abuse of right of Public Office. money claims, which may include claims for damages and
(e) Abuse of right of Processes. other affirmative reliefs. The actions hereby authorized shall
(f) Abuse of right by Contracting Party. proceed independently of each other."
(g) Abuse of right of Schools.
• Section 6 of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of
Examples of Cases When There is No Abuse of Right: 1995 [R.A. 7877]: Independent Action for
(a) Absolute Rights Damages. -Nothing in this Act shall preclude the
(b) Rights of the Corporation and its Officers and victim of work, education or training-related sexual
Directors harassment from instituting a separate and
(c) Exercise of Rights Included in Ownership independent action for damages and other
(d) Rights of Schools, Teachers and Administrator. affirmative relief.
(e) Right to Sue •
(f) Contracting Parties CONCEPT OF INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION

INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION • “The underlying purpose of the principle under

consideration is to ALLOW THE CITIZEN TO
Part I. Concept of Independent Civil Action and Article 32 of ENFORCE HIS RIGHTS IN A PRIVATE ACTION
NCC brought by him, regardless of the action of the
State attorney. It is not conducive to civic spirit
Part II. Article 33 of NCC: DEFAMATION and to individual self-reliance and initiative to
habituate the citizens to depend upon the
Part III. FRAUD AND PHYSICAL INJURIES and Article 34 of government for the vindication of their own private
NCC rights. It is true that many of the cases referred to
in the provision cited, a criminal prosecution is
proper, BUT it should be remembered that while
It includes actions for damages for:
the State is the complainant in the criminal case,
 Violation of Civil Rights
the injured individual is the one most concerned
 Violation of Political Rights
because it is he who has suffered directly. He
 Defamation
should be permitted to demand reparation for the
 Fraud
wrong which peculiarly affects him.” (Report, p.46)
 Physical Injuries and
 Neglect of Public Officers
• 2 VIEWS ON THE BASIS OF LIABILITY UNDER
ARTICLE 32, 33, AND 34 OF THE NEW CIVIL
Laws in connection with filing independent civil actions CODE1ST VIEW [Madeja vs Caro, 126 SCRA 293,
are: 296 (1983): SENATOR TOLENTINO said that =
“that the civil action which the Civil Code
• Articles 32, 33, 34 of the Chapter on Human Relations of provisions allow to be filed (particularly Article 33),
the New Civil Code is EX DELICTO, that is, CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING
• Article 135 of the Labor Code. Discrimination Prohibited. — FROM DELICT.”
•
It shall be unlawful for any employer to discriminate against
• the GENERAL RULE is that when a
any woman employee with respect to terms and conditions of
criminal action is instituted, the civil
employment solely on account of her sex.
action for recovery of civil liability arising
The following are acts of discrimination: from the offense charged is impliedly
instituted with the criminal action,
UNLESS the offended party reserves his
(a) Payment of a lesser compensation, including right to institute it separately; and after a
wage, salary or other form of remuneration and fringe criminal action has been commenced, no
benefits, to a female employee as against a male employee, civil action arising from the same offense
for work of equal value; and can be prosecuted.
•
(b) Favoring a male employee over a female • 2ND VIEW [Barredo vs. Almario, 73 Phil 607]:
employee with respect to promotion, training opportunities, JUSTICE CAGUIOA said that = “that it did not arise
study and scholarship grants solely on account of their sexes. from a crime, the basis is said to be tortious
actions more of the nature of CULPA AQUILIANA
"Criminal liability for the willful commission of any and, therefore, separate and distinct from the civil
unlawful act as provided in this article or any violation of the liability arising from crime.”
rules and regulations issued pursuant to Section 2 hereof ARTICLE 32 OF THE NEW CIVIL CODE
shall be penalized as provided in Articles 288 and 289 of this INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION FOR DAMAGES FOR
Code: Provided, That the institution of any criminal action VIOLATION OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS
under this provision shall not bar the aggrieved employee

20
 Art. 32. Any public officer or employee, or any public official, especially when he is of high rank, no
private individual, who directly or indirectly criminal action was filed by the prosecuting attorney.
obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner
impedes or impairs any of the following rights and
The requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt often
liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter
prevented the appropriate punishment.
for damages:
1. Freedom of religion; Direct and open violation of the Penal Code trampling upon
2. Freedom of speech; the freedom named are not so frequent as those subtle,
3. Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a clever and indirect ways which do not come within the pale
periodical publication; of penal laws.
4. Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention;
5. Freedom of suffrage; To promote individualism among citizens.
6. The right against deprivation of property without • HOW COMMITTED:
due process of law; • Normally involves intentional acts, the
7. The right to a just compensation when private tort of violation of civil and political rights
property is taken for public use; can also be committed through
8. The right to the equal protection of the laws; negligence. Thus, good faith on the part
9. The right to be secure in one’s person, house, of the defendant does not necessarily
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches excuse such violation.
and seizures;
10. The liberty of abode and of changing the same; • PERSONS LIABLE:
11. The privacy of communication and • He has direct and indirect participation.
correspondence; • Superior Officers.
12. The right to become a member of associations or • Subordinate Officers.
societies for purposes not contrary to law; • Judges.
13. The right to take part in a peaceable assembly to
petition the Government for redress of grievances; STATE IMMUNITY NOT A DEFENSE’
14. The right to be free from involuntary servitude in • A public officer who is the defendant in a case for
any form; damages under Article 32 of the NCC cannot escape liability
15. The right of the accused against excessive bail; under the DOCTRINE OF STATE IMMUNITY.
16. The right of the accused to be heard by himself
and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the • The doctrine of state immunity applies only if the acts
accusation against him, to have a speedy and public trial, to involved are acts done by officers in the performance of
meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory official duties within the ambit of their powers. Obviously,
process to secure the attendance of witness in his behalf; officers do not act within the ambit of their powers if they
17. Freedom from being compelled to be a witness would violate the constitutional rights of other persons.
against one’s self, or from being forced to confess guilt, or
from being induced by a promise of immunity or reward to SUSPENSION OF THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF
make such confession, except when the person confessing HABEAS CORPUS
become a State witness;
18. Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel and In a case decided under the 1973 Constitution, the
unusual punishment, unless the same is imposed or inflicted SC ruled that the suspension of the privilege of habeas
in accordance with a statute which has not been judicially corpus DOES NOT DESTROY EVERY PERSON’S RIGHT AND
declared unconstitutional; and CAUSE of action for damages under violations of
19. Freedom of access to the courts. constitutional right. WHAT IS SUSPENDED IS MERELY THE
In any of the cases referred to in this article, whether or not RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO SEEK RELEASE FROM HIS
the defendant’s act or omission constitutes a criminal offense, DETENTION THROUGH THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS as a
the aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely speedy means of obtaining his liberty. Consequently, the
separate and distinct civil action for damages, and for other suspension of the writ CANNOT BE USED AS A DEFENSE in
relief. Such civil action shall proceed independently of any cases involving Article 32 of NCC.
criminal prosecution (if the latter be instituted), and may be
proved by a preponderance of evidence. The rule is further strengthened under the 1987
The indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary Constitution. In fact, under the 1987 Constitution, even if
damages may also be adjudicated. martial law is already in force, the civil liberties of every
The responsibility herein set forth is not demandable from a person still has to be respected and the courts of justice still
judge unless his act or omission constitutes a violation of the remain open.
Penal Code or other penal statute.
EXAMPLES OF VIOLATIONS
Because the Fiscal is burdened with too many cases because 1. DUE PROCESS AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.
he believed the evidence was insufficient, or as to a few
2. RIGHT AGAINST SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
fiscals, on account of a disinclination to prosecute a fellow

21
Case: MERALCO VS. SPOUSES CHUA, G.R. No. 160422, After trial, the RTC rendered its decision in favor of the
July 5, 2010 Spouses Chua. Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the
RTC.
Facts: MERALCO is a utility company engaged in the business
MERALCO points out that it did not immediately disconnect
of sale and distribution of electricity within its franchise area.
electric service to the Chuas. It first sent several demand
The Chua’s are the beneficial users at their residence of
letters explaining the meter tampering and demanding
electric service provided by MERALCO. From June 11, 1996 to
payment for the billed differential. It was only after the
September 11, 1996, the Chua’s consumed between 231 to
Chuas refused to pay the differential billing that MERALCO
269 kilowatt hours of electricity per month, with their
disconnected their electric service. Additionally, MERALCO
corresponding monthly electric bills ranging from P747.84 to
contends that based on Section 9 of RA 7832, no writs of
P887.27.
injunction shall be issued by any court against any private
electric utility exercising its right and authority to
In October 1996, the Chua’s were surprised to receive an
disconnect electric service unless there is prima facie
electricity bill for the amount of P4,906.87 for the period of
evidence that the disconnection was made with evident bad
September 11 to October 11, 1996 (September 1996 bill).
faith or grave abuse of authority. Since the Chuas failed to
According to this bill, they consumed 1,297 kilowatt hours for
prove MERALCOs evident bad faith in disconnecting their
this one month period, or approximately 553% higher than
electric service, they are not entitled to an injunctive writ.
their previous monthly bill. Alarmed by the significant
increase, Florence Chua (the Chua’s daughter) went to the
MERALCO further posits that the deliberate manipulation of
MERALCO office to question the bill. Florence paid the bill
the dial pointers prevented the full and correct billing of the
under protest to avoid disconnection.
electric energy actually delivered to and consumed by the
Chuas. The differential billing represents the monetary
On October 31, 1996, MERALCO responded to the Chua’s equivalent of the electricity used by the Chuas but not
complaint by sending a representative, Francisco Jose Albano, registered by the meter. Lastly, MERALCO maintains that
to their residence to inspect the electric meter. Albano filed a even if it had no right to disconnect the Chuas electric
Meter/Socket Inspection Report stating that he replaced the service, the Chuas nevertheless are not entitled to moral
old meter and installed a new one because the old meters damages. The Chuas did not sustain damages after the
terminal seal was missing, the cover seal was broken, and the disconnection since they sourced their electric supply from
meter had a broken sealing wire. another electric meter within the premises.

The Chua’s were billed based on the new meter and its ISSUES:
readings from October 11, 1996 to January 24, 1997, with an 1. Whether or not MERALCO had the right to disconnect the
average usage ranging from 227 to 254 kilowatt hours, with electric service of the Chua’s.
corresponding monthly electric bills ranging from P700.00 to 2. Whether or not the issuance of the injunctive writ was in
P800.00. order.
3. Whether or not the Chua’s are entitled of the moral
On January 3, 1997, the Chua’s received a letter from damages.
MERALCO, stating that: Given the above condition(s) and in
accordance with the rules implementing Republic Act 7832,
RULING:
you are billed the amount of P183,983.66 (rate charge of
1. NO. MERALCO had no right to disconnect the electric
P179,353.26 and energy tax of P4,630.40). Furthermore, the
service of the Chua’s. As provided by law, the discovery of
company is now allowed to collect Surcharges as a penalty for
a tampered, broken, or fake seal on the meter shall only
all Violation of Contract cases apprehended effective January
constitute prima facie evidence of illegal use of electricity by
17, 1995, which would be collected later.
the person who benefits from the illegal use if such
The Chuas refused to pay as demanded. On January 24, discovery is personally witnessed and attested to by an
1997, MERALCO returned to their residence and removed officer of the law or a duly authorized representative of the
meter, thereby disconnecting their electric supply. Energy Regulatory Board(ERB). With such prima facie
On February 5, 1997, MERALCO sent the Chuas another evidence, MERALCO is within its rights to immediately
demand letter stating that it had re-evaluated the Chuas case disconnect the electric service of the consumer after due
based on field findings and the documents they furnished, notice.
and reduced the amount they had to pay from P183,983.66
In this case, we find no proof that MERALCO ever complied
to P71,737.49.
with the required presence of an officer of the law. In his
On March 11, 1997, the Chuas filed a complaint for testimony, Albano never mentioned that he was
mandamus and damages, praying that they be granted a accompanied by an authorized government representative
preliminary mandatory injunction to compel MERALCO to during the inspection. As evident from the Meter/Socket
restore the electrical connection to their residence. The Chuas Inspection Report, only Albano inspected the Chuas electric
also asked the court to award them moral and exemplary meter; no evidence shows that he was accompanied by
damages, attorneys fees, and litigation expenses. anyone else. Most telling of all, MERALCO does not even
allege in its submissions with this Court that an ERB

22
representative or an officer of the law ever accompanied its exception: an injunction can issue when a disconnection has
representative during the inspection of the Chuas electric been attended by bad faith or grave abuse of authority.
meter.
Even if Florence Chua, the Chuas daughter, acknowledged We add that while electricity is property whose enjoyment,
that she witnessed Albanos examination of the electric meter as a general rule, the owner may extend or deny to
outside their house so that she signed the Meter/Socket others,electricity is not an ordinary kind of property that a
Inspection Report, her presence did not characterize the service provider may grant or withhold to consumers at will.
discovered broken meter seal as prima facie evidence of Electricity is a basic necessity whose generation and
illegal use of electricity justifying immediate disconnection. distribution is imbued with public interest, and its provider
The presence of the consumer during the inspection cannot is a public utility subject to strict regulation by the State in
be a substitute for the presence of the government the exercise of police power. In view of the serious
representative. consequences resulting from immediate disconnection of
electric service,the law provides strict requisites that
Under the law, it states that MERALCO is authorized to MERALCO must follow before it can be granted authority to
immediately disconnect the electric service of its consumers undertake instant disconnection of electric service due to its
without the need of a court or administrative order when: (a) consumers. In view of MERALCOs dominance over its
the consumer, or someone acting in his behalf, is caught in market and its customers and the latter’s relatively weak
flagrante delicto in any of the acts enumerated in Section 4 of bargaining position as against MERALCO, and in view too of
RA 7832; or (b) when any of the circumstances constituting the serious consequences and hardships a customer stands
prima facie evidence of illegal use of electricity is discovered to suffer upon service disconnection, MERALCOs failure to
for the second time. strictly observe these legal requirements can be equated to
the bad faith or abuse of right that the law speaks of.
In flagrante delicto means [i]n the very act of committing the
crime. To be caught in flagrante delicto, therefore, necessarily
As to whether the Chuas are entitled to a writ of mandatory
implies positive identification by an eyewitness or
injunction, we rule in the affirmative. An injunctive writ
eyewitnesses to the act of tampering so that there is direct
issues only upon a showing that: a) the applicant possesses
evidence of culpability, or that which proves the fact in
a clear and unmistakable right; b) there is a material and
dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption. In
substantial invasion of such right; and c) there is urgent
the present case, however, MERALCO presented no proof that
and permanent necessity for an injunctive writ to prevent
it ever caught the Chuas, or anyone acting in the Chuas
serious damage. In the present case, the Chuas have
behalf, in the act of tampering with their electric meter. As
established that they are paying MERALCO customers. In
correctly observed by the CA, the Chuas could not have been
the absence of the prima facie evidence required by Section
caught in flagrante delicto committing the tampering since in
4 and by the requirements of Section 6 of RA 7832 that the
the first place, they were the ones who reported the defect in
Chuas tampered with their electric meter, and in light as
their meter. Moreover, the presence of a broken cover seal,
well of the merits of the Chuas case as discussed below, the
broken sealing wire, and a missing terminal seal, is not
Chuas have an unmistakable right to be provided with
enough to declare the Chuas in flagrante delicto tampering
continuous power supply a right MERALCO obviously
with the electric meter. As the basic complaint for mandamus
invaded when it cut off the Chuas electric service. Electricity
alleged, without any serious refutation from the petitioner,
being what it is and has been in modern day living, an
the electric meter is in a concrete post outside of the Chuas
urgent and permanent need exists to prevent MERALCO
perimeter fence; hence, in a location accessible to the public.
from cutting off the Chuas electric service under the
We note, too, that MERALCO did not present any evidence
circumstances that gave rise to the present dispute.
that it caught the Chuas committing any of the acts
Accordingly, we uphold the RTC and CA decisions ordering
constituting prima facie evidence of illegal use of electricity
MERALCO to immediately restore the Chuas electric service.
for the second time.

2. YES. Under the circumstances, we cannot but conclude 3. YES. Article 32 of the Civil Code provides that moral
that MERALCO abused its superior and dominant position as damages are proper when the rights of individuals,
well as the authority granted to it by law as a service provider including the right against deprivation of property without
when it persisted in disconnecting the Chuas electric service. due process of law, are violated. Jurisprudence has
established the following requisites for the award of moral
damages: (1) there is an injury whether physical, mental,
Under Section 9. Restriction on the Issuance of Restraining
or psychological clearly sustained by the claimant; (2) there
Orders or Writs of Injunction. No writ of injunction or
is a culpable act or omission factually established; (3) the
restraining order shall be issued by any court against any
wrongful act or omission of the defendant is the proximate
private electric utility or rural electric cooperative exercising
cause of the injury sustained by the claimant; and (4) the
the right and authority to disconnect electric service as
award of damages is predicated on any of the cases stated
provided in this Act, unless there is prima facie evidence that
in Article 2219 of the Civil Code.
the disconnection was made with evident bad faith or grave
abuse of authority. Hence, the general prohibition against the
issuance of a restraining order or an injunction under Section Considering the manner MERALCO disconnected the Chuas
9 of RA 7832 cannot apply. Rather, what must prevail is the electric service, we find the award of moral damages
proper. Apart from the havoc wreaked on the Chuas daily
23
lives when MERALCO abruptly and without legal basis cut off Libel - means by writing or similar means A libel
their electricity, the removal of the electric meter also caused committed by means of writing, printing, lithography,
the Chuas extreme social humiliation and embarrassment as engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical
they were subjected to speculations in their neighborhood of exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar
being power thieves. As Mrs. Felicidad Chua testified, she means, shall be punished by prision correccional in its
suffered sleepless nights and felt serious anxiety after the minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from 200 to
removal of their electric meter came to the attention of the 6,000, or both, in addition to the civil action which may be
barangay. In fact, she even had to consult a doctor for this brought by the offended party.
anxiety. Thus, even if the Chuas did subsequently obtain their
electricity from another source, the damage to the Chuas
Article 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present
reputation and social standing had already been done.
such publication for a compensation.

As prevailing jurisprudence deems the award of moral

The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000
damages in the amount of P100,000.00 appropriate in cases
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who
where MERALCOwrongfully disconnected electric service, we
threatens another to publish a libel concerning him or the
uphold the CA ruling, reducing the moral damages awarded
parents, spouse, child, or other members of the family of
from P300,000.00 to P100,000.00.
the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the
publication of such libel for a compensation or money
Article 33:In case of defamation, fraud or physical injuries,
consideration.
and action separate and distinct from the criminal action may
be maintained by the injured party.
Slander
DEFAMATION Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum
 The offense of injuring a person’s character, fame or period if it is of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise,
reputation through false and malicious statements; the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos,

 Tends to injure reputation or to diminish the esteem,

respect, good will or confidence in the plaintiff or to excite Slander by deed
derogatory feelings or opinions about the plaintiff; The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging
 Publication of anything which is injurious to the good from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person
name or reputation of another or tends to bring him into who shall perform any act not included and punished in this
disrepute. title, which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon
another person. If said act is not of a serious nature, the
penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
 invasion of relational interest since it involves the
pesos.
opinion which others in the community may have, or tend
to have, of the plaintiff. (MVRS Publications, Inc. et al vs.
Applicability to Article 33 of New Civil Code
Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines Inc, et al)
 Jurisprudence on and the concepts and
requirements of defamation under RPC are also
A statement is defamatory if it tends to
used to determine liability for damages under
1. injure the plaintiff in his trade;
Article 33 of the New Civil Code.
2. profession, or community standing
3. lower him in the estimation of the
Cyberlibel
community.
Section 4 of R.A. No. 10175 or the “CYBERCRIME
PREVENTION ACT OF 2012” provides that:
(Liberty Lobby Inc. v. Dow Jones & Co.)
Libel - The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in
Libel - written defamation Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
Slander - oral defamation committed through a computer system or any other similar
means which may be devised in the future.
Case: Disini, Jr. et al v. The Secretary of Justice
Article 353 of RPC - Definition of LibelPublic and malicious
The SC sustained the constitutionality of the provision
imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or
insofar as the cybercrime law penalizes the author of the
imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or
libelous statement or article. The provision merely
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or
incorporates to form part of it the provisions of the RPC on
contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the
libel.
memory of one who is dead.
Reason for Liability
The desire to protect the reputation of every individual.

24
 Community Standard
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS • The mere fact that the plaintiff’s feeling and
sensibilities have been offended is not enough to
Case; Quisumbing v. Lopez, et al create a cause of action for defamation.
The SC emphasized that every citizen has the right to enjoy a • Defamation requires that something be
good name and reputation, but should not let the respondents communicated to a third person that may affect
violate the right or abuse the freedom of the press. the opinion others may have of the plaintiff.
• The unprivileged communication must be shown of
The newspapers should be given such leeway and tolerance a statement that would tend to hurt the plaintiff’s
as to enable them to courageously and effectively perform reputation, to impair plaintiff’s standing in the
their important role on the democracy. community.
• The focus of a defamation action is upon the
In the preparation of stories, press reporters and edition allegedly defamatory statement itself and its
usually have to race with their deadlines; and consistently predictable effect upon third persons. (MVRS
with good faith and reasonable care, they should not be held Publications, Inc. v. Islamic Da’wah Council of the
to account, to a point of suppression, for honest mistakes or Phils)
imperfection in the choice of words.
Allegation of Non-Performance of Obligation
Test in Determining Liability: • Mere assertion that a person failed to refused to
• The constitutional guarantees require a federal rule perform contractual obligation does not, in and of
that prohibits a public official from recovering itself, injure the person’s business reputation or
damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his deprive him of public confidence. (Insular Life
official conduct unless he proves that the statement Insurance Assurance v. Serrano)
was made with actual malice. (Lopez v. CA)
Imputation of a Crime, Vice, or Defect
Requisites of Liability: (Ramos v. CA) • There is a defamatory imputation if there is a
1. There must be defamatory imputation; statement that a public official is guilty of
2. Imputation must be malicious; misconduct in public office, bribery, malversation
3. The imputation must be given publicity; and of public funds, graft, and corruption. The gravity
4. The victim must be identifiable. of the imputations is sufficient to impeach the
public official’s honesty, virtue, integrity, and
Imputation is defamatory reputation as a public official. (Lopez Daez v. CA)
The defamatory character may be established by showing
that: Publication (communication of the defamatory
information to third persons)
DEFAMATORY as a matter of law
 if the defamation is so plain that the charge is • It is not required that the publication is made in
automatically deemed libelous. media publications. Publication is also sufficient if
 the defamatory statement was written in a wall
Test in Determining the Defamatory Character of the using a paint brush or if painted on billboards.
words Used: (Magno v. People; Lopez v. People)
• Words calculated to induce suspicion are sometimes
more effective to destroy reputation than false • Dissemination to a number of people is, however,
charges directly made. Ironical and metaphorical not required and communication to a single
language is favored vehicle of slander. A charge is individual is sufficient.
sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the
hearers to suppose and understand that the person • The sending of an unsealed libelous letter to the
or persons against whom they were uttered were offended party constitutes publication. There is a
guilty of certain offense, are sufficient to impeach reasonable probability that the contents of the
their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to hold the unsealed envelope, particularly the libelous letter,
person or persons up to public ridicule. (Sazon v. could be read by a third person. (Magno v. People)
CA) Malice
• There is malice when the author of the imputation
Standard of an Ordinary Reader is prompted by personal ill-will or spite and speaks
• In determining the defamatory character of words not in response to a duty but merely to injure the
used, the judge must consider the allegedly libelous reputation of the person who claims to have been
passages in the context of the entire article and defamed. (Alonzo v. CA)
evaluate the words as they are commonly
understood. He must put himself in the shoes of the • To be considered malicious, the libelous statement
average reader and decide whether such reader must be shown to have been written or published
would interpret the message as libellous. with the knowledge that they are false or in

25
 reckless disregard of whether they are false or not. act performed by public officers in the exercise of
(Villanueva v. Philippine Daily Inquirer) their functions.

Reckless disregard of what is false or not Malice in fact (express malice, real malic, true malice or
• the author or publisher entertains serious doubts as particular malice)
to the truth of the publication, or that he possesses
a high degree of awareness of their probable falsity.
Identification of the Defamed
 To be successful, the plaintiff must establish that
• Only those statements made with the high degree of
the defamatory statement referred to him.
awareness of their probable falsity demanded by
 It is essential that the victim be identifiable
jurisprudence may be the subject of either civil or
although it is not necessary that he be named.
criminal sanctions. (Garrison v. State of Louisiana)
 It is sufficient if it is shown that the offended party
is the person meant or alluded to. (Yuchengco v.
Evidence of Malice (Sazon v. CA)
The Manila Chronicle Publishing Corp)
• Extrinsic evidence
 It is also not sufficient that the offended party
• Reliance on the words used by the defendant and the
recognized himself as the person attacked or
circumstances attending the publication of the
defamed, but it must be shown that at least a third
defamatory imputation.
person could identify him as the object of the
libelous publication. (Borjal v. CA)
Source of News Report
• A reporter may rely on information given by a lone
Group Libel
source although it reflects only one side of the story
• If the defamatory statements were directed at a
provided the reporter does not entertain a high
small, restricted group of persons, they applied to
degree of awareness of its probable falsity. (Flor v.
any member of the group, and an individual
People)
member could maintain an action for defamation.
• When the defamatory language was used toward a
• While the journalist may be held criminally liable for
small group or class, including every member, it
libel, he cannot be compelled to reveal the source of
has been held that the defamatory language
the information given to him in confidence unless a
referred to each member so that each could
House or committee of Congress determines that
maintain an action.
revealing the source is demanded by the security of
• If the defamatory words are used broadly in
the State.
respect to a large class or group of persons, and
there is nothing that points to a particular member
KINDS OF MALICE
of the class or group, no member has a right of
Malice in law (constructive malice, legal malice or implied
action for libel or slander.
malice)
• Where the defamatory matter had no special,
• presumption of law
personal application and was so general that no
• dispenses with the proof of malice when words that
individual damage could be presumed, and that
raise the presumption are shown to have been
the class referred to was so numerous, no private
uttered.
action could be maintained.
Article 354 of RPC
Deceased
 Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be
• Relatives of the deceased can file an action for
malicious, even if it is true, if no good intention and
damage to the reputation of the latter. (Article 353
justifiable motive for making it shown.
of RPC)
 The plaintiff or the prosecution need not prove
Corporation
malice on the part of the defendant.
• The corporate can file a case if its reputation as an
 The burden is on the side of the defendant to show
entity was defamed.
good intention and justifiable motive in order to
• Libel is one of the exceptional cases when the
overcome the legal inference of malice. (Sazon v.
corporation can claim moral damages because the
Ca)
claim of moral damages falls under item 7 of
Article 354 of RPC (EXCEPTION) Article 2219 of the NCC. Said provision does not
1. A private communication made by any person to qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or juridical
another in the performance of any legal, moral or person. Therefore a juridical person such as a
social duty; and corporation can validly complain for libel or any
other form of defamation and claim for moral
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without damages. (Filipinas Broadcasting Network Inc. v.
any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative AMEC-BCCM)
or other official proceedings which are not of
confidential nature, or of any statement, report or DEFENSES
speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other

26
 • to escape liability, the defendant or accused in a • Statements made in official proceedings of the
defamation case may claim that the statements legislature by members thereof (Sec. 11 of Art. VI,
made are privileged. 1987 Constitution)
• PRIVILEGED STATEMENTS • Statements made in the course of judicial
• ABSOLUTE – the imputation is not proceedings but only if they are pertinent/ relevant
actionable, even if attended by actual to the case involved.
malice • A public officer must not be too thin skinned with
• CONDITIONAL (QUALIFIEDLY PRIVILEGED reference to comment upon his official acts.
COMMUNICATION) – may still be actionable • Criticism does not authorize defamation.
if actual malice is proven. Nevertheless, as the individual is less than the
State, so must expected criticism be born for the
TEST OF GOOD FAITH / bona fides common good. Rising superior to any official or set
• To determine w/on the same can be considered of officials, to the Chief Executive, to the
protected Legislature, to the Judiciary – to any or all the
• Even if untrue, the same may not be considered agencies of Government – public opinion should be
defamatory the constant source of liberty and democracy.

Case: UNITED STATES V. FELIPE BUSTO • The guaranties of a free speech and a free press
“Communication made bona fide upon any subject-matter in include the right to criticize judicial conduct.
which the party communicating has an interest, or in • Attempted terrorization of public opinion on the
reference to which he has a duty, is privileged, if made to a part of the judiciary would be tyranny of the basset
person having a corresponding interest or duty, although it sort.
contained incriminatory matter which without his privilege • On the contrary, it is a duty which every one owes
would be slanderous and actionable.” to society or to the State to assist in the
-Lord Campbell, C.J. investigation of any alleged misconduct. It is,
further, the duty of all know of any official
Must be made under honest sense of duty, a self-seeking dereliction on the part of a magistrate or the
motive is destructive. Personal injury is not necessary. All wrongful act of any public officer to bring the facts
persons have an interest in the pure and efficient to the notice of those whose duty it is to inquire
administration of justice and of public affairs. The duty under into and punish them
which a party is privileged is sufficient if it is social or moral in
its nature and this person in good faith believe he is acting in “The people are not obliged to speak of the conduct of their
pursuance thereof although in fact he is mistaken intemperate officials in whispers or with bated breath in a free
terms. government, but only in a despotism.”
- Justice Gayner, Howarth v. Barlow [1906], 113
App. Div., N.Y., 510
A further element of the law of privilege concerns the person -
to whom the complaint should be made. The rule is that if a Qualified privilege communication
party applies to the wrong person through some natural and
honest mistake as to the respective functions of various ART. 354 Requirement for publicity. – Every defamatory
officials such unintentional error will not take the case out of imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if
the privilege. no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is
shown, except in the following cases:
MALICE can be presumed from defamatory words. PRIVILEGE 1. A private communication made by any person to
destroy that presumption. another in the performance of any legal, moral, or
The ONUS of proving malice then lies on the plaintiff. social duty; and
The plaintiff must bring home to the defendant the existence 2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without
of malice as the true motive of his conduct. any comments or remarks, of any judicial,
FALSEHOOD and the ABSENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE will legislative, or other official proceedings which are
amount to proof of malice not of confidential nature, or of any statement,
(see white V. Nicholls [1845], 3 how., 266) report, or speech delivered in said proceedings, or
of any other act performed by public officers in the
A privileged communication should not be subjected to
exercise of their functions
microscopic examination to discover grounds of malice or
falsity. Such excessive would defeat the protection which the ART. 354 Requirement for publicity.
law throws over privileged communications. • Non-constitutional privileged statements
The ultimate test is that of Bona Fides. • Imputations can still be shown to be malicious by
(see white V. Nicholls [1845], 3 how., 266) proof/actual malice or malice in fact
• Known to be qualifiedly privileged communications
ABSOLUTELY PRIVILEGED MATTERS
• Merely exceptions to the general rule

27
 • Every defamatory imputation is presumed Case: United States V. Cañete
to be malicious even if true, if no good SC: The interest sought to be protected by the person
intention and justifiable motive is shown making the communication need not be his own, but may
• Presumption of malice is done away with when the refer to an interest shared by the other members of the
defamatory imputation qualifies as privileged society
communication
• XPN: Proof of actual malice is required in order that Case: United States V. Bustos
a defamatory imputation may be held actionable SC:”xxx Private communication is a communication made
-BASED ON WIDER GUARANTEE OF FREEDOM OF bona fide upon any subject-matter in which the party
EXPRESSION AS AN INSTITUTION OF ALL REPUBLICAN communicating has an interest, or in reference to which he
SOCIETIES has a duty, is privileged, if made to a person having a
corresponding interest or duty, although it contained
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION incriminatory matter which without this privilege would be
• Ordinary citizen has a right and duty to involve slanderous and actionable.
himself in matters that affect the public welfare, and, Eg. A complaint made in good faith and without malice in
for this purpose to inform himself of such matters. regard to the character or conduct of a public official when
addressed to an officer or a board having some interest or
Enumeration in art. 354 not exclusive duty in the matter.”
• Fair commentaries on matters of public interest are
likewise privileged.
Case: Buatis Jr. V. People
1. A private communication made by any
• The accused admitted that he dictated the letter to
person to another in the performance of any
one of her secretaries who typed the same and
legal, moral or social duty
made a print out of the computer.
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith,
• While accused addressed the reply-letter to the
without any comments or remarks, of any
complainant, the same letter showed that it was
judicial, legislative or other official
copy furnished to all concerned.
proceedings which are not confidential in
• His lack of selectivity is indicative of malice and is
nature, or any statement, report or speech
anathema to his claim of privileged
delivered in said proceedings, or of any
communication.
other act performed by public offciers in the
• Such publication had already created upon the
exercise of their functions
minds of the readers a circumstance which brought
3. Fair commentaries on matters of public
discredit and shame to the complainant’s
concern
reputation.
• If no public interest can be invoked, the persons
• Since the letter is not a privileged communication,
accused of libel cannot claim that the newspaper
malice is presumed under Art. 354 of the Revised
article is covered by the qualified privilege
Penal Code.

Case: Binay V. Secretary Of Justice

COMPLAINTS AGAINST PUBLIC OFFICIALS
• SC: “ xxx cannot discern a legal, moral, or social
• A complaint against public officials addressed to
duty in publishing Joanna’s status as an adopted
proper authorities is qualifiedly privileged within
daughter. Neither is here any public interest
the purview of par. 1 art. 354 because the filing
respecting her purchases of panties worth
thereof is being done in the performance of one’s
P1,000.00. Whether she indeed bought those panties
duty as a citizen
is not something that the public can afford any
• It is a right and duty of a citizen to make a
protection against. With this backdrop, it is obvious
complaint of any misconduct on the part of public
that private respondents’ only motive in inserting
officials, which comes to his notice, to those
paragraph 25 in the subject article is to embarrass
charged with supervision over them
Joanna before the reading public.
• Such complaints should be addressed solely to
some official having jurisdiction to inquire into the
Private communications (par 1, art. 354)
charges, or power to redress the grievance or has
a) The person who made the communication had a
some duty to perform or interest in connection
legal, moral, or social duty to make the
therewith*
communication, or at least, had an interest to
protect, which interest may either be his own or of
REPORT TO A SUPERIOR OFFICER
the one to whom it is made;
b) The communication is addressed to an officer or a
board, or superior, having some interest or duty in In the case of Deano v. Godinez:
the matter, and who has the power to furnish the SC: “Indeed, the communication now denounced by plaintiff
protection sought; and as a defamatory is one sent by defendant to his immediate
c) The statements in the communication are made in superior in the performance of a legal duty, or in the nature
good faith and without malice. of a report submitted in the exercise of official function.

28
“He sent it as an explanation of a matter contained in an undeniable fact that said pleadings are presumed to contain
indorsement sent to him by his superior officer. It is a report allegations and assertions lawful and legal in nature,
submitted in obedience to a lawful duty, though in doing so appropriate to the disposition of issues ventilated before the
defendant employed a language somewhat harsh and courts for the proper administration of justice and,
uncalled for. But such is excusable in the interest of public therefore, of general public concern. Moreover, pleadings
policy.” are presumed to contain allegations substantially true
because they can be supported by evidence presented in
good faith, the contents of which would be under the
XPN: The privilege is negated if the report is circulated to
scrutiny of courts, and therefore, subject to be purged of all
other persons.
improprieties and illegal statements contained therein.

Thus, in one case, the letter report lost its character as a

“We are firmly convinced that the correct role on the matter
qualified privileged communication when the defendant
should be that a fair and true report of a complaint filed in
furnished copies thereof to several provincial and national
court without remarks nor comments even before an
government agencies which had no interest, right or duty to
answer is filed or a decision promulgated should be covered
prosecute said charges.*
by the privilege.”

Qualified privilege communication

Case: Manuel v. pano
ART. 362 Libelous remarks – Libelous remarks or comments
connected with the matter privileged under the provisions of
Article 354, if made with malice, shall not exempt the author Publication of a complaint, being true a true and fair report
thereof nor the editor or managing editor of a newspaper of a judicial proceeding, made in good faith witho ut
from criminal liability comment or remarks, is privileged and comes under Item 2
of Article 354.
ALLEGATIONS IN PLEADINGS It is no longer correct to state that Art. 354 is not applicable
• Allegations and averments in pleadings filed in court because the published complaint as filed would not by itself
are absolutely privileged as long as they are relevant constitute a judicial proceeding, as the issues have not as
or pertinent to the issues yet been joined.
• Test of Relevance: To break through the protective
barrier of an absolutelty privileged communication is
Case: Gma Network, Inc. Et. Al. V. Bustos
not bona fides
Facts: Falls under second kind of qualifiedly privileged
• No liability so long as averments are relevant to the
communications under Art. 354
issues involved in the case
Involved in the news telecast was narration of the
Case: Justiniani V. Castillo
allegations in the Petition for Mandamus filed in court.
• Statements made in a pleading in a civil action are
However the plaintiff was not bale to establish actual malice
absolutely privileged and no action for libel may be
in the case.
founded thereon provided such statements are
pertinent and relevant to the subject inquiry,
SC: “The subject news report was clearly a fair and true
however false and malicious they may be.
report, a simple narration of the allegations contained in
• In People v. Aquino, we held that the person who
and circumstances surrounding the filing by the
freely articulated himself while exercising his duty
unsuccessful examinees of the petition for mandamus
under the express authority of law, may he be the
before the court, and made without malice.”
judge, lawyer or witness, does not expose himself to
the risk of criminal prosecution or of an action for Petitioners entitled to the protection and the immunity of
damages. the rule on privileged matters under Art. 354 (2) of the RPC
• “If the rule were otherwise, the courts would be They cannot therefore be made liable for damages sought
flooded with libel suits from irate litigants who will be by the plaintiffs who were holding public office.
suing each other on the basis of each and every
pleading. Such a rule will breed endless vexatious EXCECPTION:A reporter, editor or manager of a newspaper,
litigations contrary to public policy and the orderly daily or magazine may be made liable for libel under Art.
administration of justice.” 357 of the Revised Penal Code if he publishes facts
connected with the private life of another and offensive to
Publication and news report of a Pleading honor virtue and reputation of said person even though said
Q: Is the publication of a complaint filed in court or any publication is made in connection with or under the pretext
quasi-judicial agency before any judicial action is taken that it is necessary in the narration of any judicial or
thereon, privileged as a report of a judicial proceeding? administrative proceedings wherein such facts have been
mentioned
Case: Cuenco v. Cuenco
“xxx not only because said pleadings have become part of PUBLIC OFFICERS AND PUBLIC FIGURES
public record open to the public scrutinize, but also due to the

29
Case: New York Times V. Sullivan • The accused must show that he has a justifiable
• Then City commissioner L.B. Sullivan of reason for the defamatory statement even if it was
Montgomery, Alabama, sued New York Times for in fact true.
publishing a paid political advertisement espousing
racial equality and describing police atrocities Fair comments & other doctrines
committed against students inside a college campus.
DOCTRINE OF FAIR COMMENT
• As commissioner having charge over police actions
 Fair commentaries on matters of public interest are
Sullivan felt that he was sufficiently identified in the
privileged and constitute a valid defense in an
ad as the perpetrator of the outrage: Consequently,
action for libel or slander.
he sued New York Times on the basis of what he
believed were libellous utterances against him  When the discreditable imputation is directed
against public person in his public capacity it is not
• US Supreme Court ruled against Sullivan
necessarily actionable
• Honest criticisms on the conduct of public
• False allegation of a fact
officials and public figures are insulated
• Comment based on false supposition
from libel judgments.
• The guarantees of freedom of speech and  If the comment is an expression of opinion, based
press prohibit a public official or public on established facts, then it is immaterial that the
figure from recovering damages for a opinion happens to be mistaken mas long as it
defamatory falsehood relating to his official might reasonably be inferred from facts.
conduct unless he proves that the
statement was made with actual malice,
i.e., with knowledge that it was false or with
reckless disregard of whether it was false or PRIVILEGE OF NEUTRAL REPORTAGE
not.
•
Case: Filipinas Broadcasting Networks, Inc. v. Ago
New York times doctrine
Medical and Educational Center – Bicol, et. Al.
• “To require critics of official conduct to guarantee the
truth of all their factual assertions on pain of libel
judgments would lead to self-censorship, since would “xxx Under this privilege, a republisher who accurately and
be critics would be deterred from voicing out their disinterestedly reports certain defamatory statements made
criticisms even if such were believed to be true, or against public figures is shielded from liability, regardless of
were in fact true, because of doubt whether it could the republisher’s subjective awareness of the truth or falsity
be proved or because of fear the expense of having of the accusation. Xxx”
to prove it.”

Case: Borjal V. Court Of Appeals

Actual malice rule
SC clarified that writings may still be considered privileged
• Prosecution failed to prove not only that the charges
even they are not within the exceptions of Art. 354 of the
made by the petitioner were false but also that petitioner
Revised Penal Code, that is, even if they are neither “private made them with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless
communications” nor “fair and true report without any disregard of whether they were false or not.
comments or remarks.”

The enumeration under Art. 354 is not an exclusive list of Case; Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
qualifiedly privileged communications. Society’s interest on public officials is not limited to the
discharge of his official functions. Public interest extends to
GR: Malice can be presumed from defamatory words, the anything which might touch on an official’s fitness for office
privileged character of a communication destroys the
presumption of malice. Hence, the “actual malice” rule applies on publications
The onus of proving actual malice then lies on plaintiff. relating thereto.

The plaintiff must bring home to the defendant, the existence Public figure
of malice as the true motive of his conduct. “Any person who, by his acomplishments, fame, mode of
living, or by adopting a profession or calling which gives the
PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs, and his
• The prosecution need not prove the presence of character has become a ‘public personage’. He is, in other
malice. words, a celebrity. Obviously, to be included in this
• Law explicitly presumes its existence (malice in law) category are those who have achieved some degree of
from the defamatory character of the assailed reputation by appearing before the public, as in the case of
statements. an actor, a professional baseball player, a pugilist, or any
other entertainer. “
30
 • Third, this would impose an additional difficulty on
Case: Ayers Producion Pty., Ltd., v. Capulong trial court judges to decide which publications
1) Involuntary Public Figures address issues of general interest and which do
• Become public figures through no not.
purposeful actions of their own
2) All-purpose public figures Candidates for public office
• Attain a status according to which they • Villanueva v. Philippine Daily Inquirer
assumed roles of special prominence in the • These are matters about which the public
affairs of the society has the right to be informed, taking into
• Occupy positions of such pervasive power account the very public character of the
and influence election itself. For this reason, they
3) Limited-purpose public figures attracted media mileage and drew public
• Thrust themselves to the forefront of attention not only to the election itself but
particular public controversies in order to to the candidates
influence the resolution of the issues
involved Liberal treatment of libel
• Invite attention and comment • SC MC NO. 08-2008 dated Jan. 25, 2008
• The Supreme Court clarified the liberal
Private parties who are not public figures policy in the imposition of penalties in
libel cases.
Case: Philippine Journalist, Inc. (people’s Journal) V.
• All courts and judges concerned should
Theonen
henceforth take note of the foregoing rule
of preference set by Supreme Court on
 “A newspaper or broadcaster publishing defamatory
the matter of the Imposition of penalties
falsehoods about an individual who is neither a
for the crime if libel.
public official nor a public figure may not claim
constitutional privilege against liability, for injury
• This Administrative Circular does not remove
inflicted, even if the falsehood arose in a discussion
imprisonment as an alternative penalty for the
of public interest.
crime libel under Article 355 of the Revised Penal

Code;
 No qualified privilege for defamatory remarks against
private individuals who are not public figures. Malice
• The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of
in fact need not be proved.
sound discretion, and taking into consideration the
peculiar circumstances of each case, determine
Case: Philippine Journalist, Inc. (People’s Journal) v.
whether the imposition of a fine alone would best
Theonen
serve the interests of justice or whether forbearing
• First, Public officials and public figures usually enjoy
to impose imprisonment would depreciate the
significantly greater access to the channels of
seriousness of the offense, work violence on the
effective communication and hence have a more
social order, or otherwise be contrary to the
realistic opportunity to counteract false statements
imperative of justice;
than private individuals normally enjoy. Private
individuals are therefore more vulnerable to injury,
• Should only a fine be imposed and the accused be
and the state interest in protecting them is
unable to pay the fine, there is no legal obstacle to
correspondingly greater.
the application of the Revised Penal Code provision
on subsidiary imprisonment.
• Second, an individual who decides to seek
governmental office must accept certain necessary
Damages
consequences of that involvement in public affairs.
• Generally, the tiems of damages allowed under the
He runs the risk of closer public scrutiny than might
New Civil Code may awarded provided that the
otherwise be the case. Those classed as public
damages are directly caused by the wrongful act.
figures stand in a similar position. For the most part
• Under Art. 2219(7) of the New Civil Code, an
those who attain this status have assumed roles of
award of moral damages is allowed for libel,
especial prominence in the affairs of society. Some
slander or other forms of defamation
occupy positions of such persuasive power and
• “Implied Damages” mentioned in Juan Phee v. La
influence that they are deemed public figures for all
Vanguardia, Inc., is not recognized under the New
purposes. More commonly, those classed as public
Civil Code and the Revised Penal Code.
figures have thrust themselves to the forefront of
• The rule recognizing “implied damages” for libel
particular public controversies in order to influence
per se is a presumption in common law that
the resolution of the issues involved. In either event,
general damages are incurred and the jury is
they invite attention and comment.
permitted to estimate the harm to the plaintiff’s
reputation.

31
 • General Damages is not recognized in the New Civil
Code provisions on Damages. GR: OPINION IS NOT ACTIONABLE
• In fact, the rule allowing “implied” or “general
damages” is already deemed abrogated by the Gerz Case: Songco Vs. Sellner, 37 PHIL. 254
v. Robert Welch, Inc. ruling. Facts:Both Defendant, Sellner and the plaintiff, Songco
owned a farm and both properties had the sugar cane ready
MITIGATION to be cut.
• Filipinas Broadcasting Networks, Inc. v. Ago Medical
and Educational Center-Bicol, et. Al., Sellner bought the Songco’s cane for P12,000 and executed
• Evidence of an honest mistake or the want three promissory notes. One of the PNs was not paid. Thus,
of character or reputation of the party instituted a case.
libelled goes only in mitigation of damages
• With respect to evidence of honest mistake, Sellner said promissory note was obtained from him by
the same may, in fact, exculpate the means of certain false and fraudulent representations
defendant because it may establish lack of therein specified.
malice.
It is claimed that the plaintiff estimated that this cane
• Filipinas Broadcasting Networks, Inc. v. Ago Medical would produce 3,000 piculs of the sugar and that the
and Educational Center-Bicol, et. Al., defendant bought the crop believing this estimate to be
• On the other hand, the New Civil Code and substantially correct. As the crop turned out it produced
the RPC does not provide that want of 2,017 piculs, gross, and after the toll for milling was
character or reputation may mitigate the deducted the net left to the defendant was very much less.
damages to be awarded to the plaintiff.
• However, it is also acceptable to reduce, the Issue: Whether or not the plaintiff was guilty of fraudulent
amount of moral damages to be awarded on representation of his cane.
account of such proof.
Ruling:No. Misinterpretation upon a mere matter of opinion
FRAUD is not an actionable deceit, nor is it a sufficient ground for
Tort of Fraud under Article 33 includes cases which constitute avoiding a contract as fraudulent. The law allows
the tort of deceit in the United States and in England. considerable latitude to seller’s statements, or dealer’s talk;
and experience teaches that it is exceedingly risky to accept
Elements of cause of action: it at its face value.
1. Defendant made false representation to the plaintiff
2. The representation must be one of fact
3. Defendant must know that the representation is false A man who relies upon such an affirmation made by a
or be reckless about whether it is false person whose interest might so readily prompt him to
4. Defendant must have acted on the false exaggerate the value of his property does so at his peril,
representation and must take the consequences of his own imprudence.
5. Defendant must have intended that the
representation should be acted on Case: Elenita Ledesma Silva v. Esther Peralta
6. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of acting on the (G.R. No. L-13114)
representation
Facts: Saturnino Silva, an American citizen and US Army
What constitutes false representation? officer, was married to one Priscilla Isabel of Australia.
• Those made by spoken or written words While deployed in the Philippines, Saturnino married
• Those made by conduct appellee Esther which was allegedly executed since no
• Which are calculated to mislead another and thereby documents for the purpose of marriage were prepared. The
allow the defendant to obtain undue advantage over said marriage produced a child.
them.
While in the US for medical treatment, Saturnino divorced
Section 526 of the Restatement of Torts considers
therein Priscilla and contracted another marriage now with
misrepresentation fraudulent if the maker:
appellant Elenita Ledesma. Upon Saturnino’s return to the
1. Knows or believes that the matter is NOT as he
Philippines, Esther demanded support for the child and
represents it to be
upon his refusal, instituted a suit.
2. Does not have the confidence in the accuracy of his
representation that he states or implies
Thereupon, Elenita moved to enjoin Esther from
3. Knows that he does not have the basis for his
representing herself as wife of Saturnino and prayed for the
representation that he states or implies
award of moral damages for the humiliation and distress
she suffered upon learning his husband had a child.
Cases of fraud covered by Article 33 includes
• Estafa
Esther filed a counterclaim for actual damages and fees due
• Misrepresentation by the seller or manufacturer
to the harassment and moral damages caused by
32
Saturnino’s marital relation with Elenita and his subsequent – Personality
refusal to acknowledge their offspring. – Privacy
– Peace of Mind
Issue: Whether or not appellee Esther Peralta is entitled to • “ART. 26. Every person shall respect the dignity,
damages because of Saturnino’s affair and abandonment. personality, privacy and peace of mind of his
neighbors and other persons. The following and
Ruling: YES. The damages awarded are a natural and direct other similar acts, though they may not constitute
consequence of Silva’s deceitful maneuvers in making love to a criminal offense shall produce a cause of action
Esther, and inducing her to yield to his advances and live with for damages, prevention and other relief:
him as his wife (when Silva knew all the time that he could • Prying into the privacy of another’s residence;
not marry Esther Peralta because of his undissolved marriage • Meddling with or disturbing the private life or
to an Australian woman, a prior wedlock that he concealed family relations of another;
from appellee). • Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from
his friends;

It is clear that Esther Peralta would not have consented to the RESPECT FOR HUMAN DIGNITY
liaison had there been no concealment of Silva’s previous
 Art. 26 and the provisions on moral damages are
marriage, or that the birth of the child was a direct result of
included in order to remedy defects in old CC in so
this connection. That Esther had to support the child because
far as it did not properly exalt human personality.
Silva abandoned her before it was born is likewise patent
• The touchstone of every system of laws, of the
upon the record, and we cannot see how said appellant can
culture and civilization of every country, is how far
be excused from liability therefor.
it dignifies man.

Physical injuries CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY

Cases of physical injuries covered by Article 33 includes:
• Attempted, frustrated and consummated homicide
Privacy
• Reckless imprudence
a) constitutional right to privacy rights included
• Battery
1. right against unreasonable search andseizures (Sec. 2,
• Assault
Constitution)
•
2. the right to privacy of one's communication and
In Madeja vs Caro, cited Corpus vs. Paje, L-26737, July
correspondence (Sec. 3 (1), Constitution)
31, 1969, 28 SCRA 1062, which states that reckless
3. right against self incrimination (Sec. 17, Constitution)
imprudence or criminal negligence is not included in Article 33
of the Civil Code is not authoritative.
 whether this expectation is one that society
Of eleven justices only nine took part in the decision and four recognizes as reasonable
of them merely concurred in the result.
• Sec. 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty,
Article 34:When a member of a city or municipal police force or property without due process of law, nor shall
refuses or fails to render aid or protection to any person in any person be denied the equal protection of the
case of danger to life or property, such peace officer shall be laws.
primarily liable for damages, and the city or municipality shall
be subsidiarily responsible therefor. • Sec. 2. The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects against
The civil action herein recognized shall be independent of any unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever
criminal proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and
suffice to support such action. no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except upon probable cause to be determined
Rationale: If they are unfaithful to their duty, Article 34
personally by the judge after examination under
grants to the person damaged a right action against a
oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
recreant policeman.
witnesses he may produce, and particularly
describing the place to be searched and the
On the other hand, the Subsidiary liability of cities and
persons or things to be seized.
municipalities, is imposed so that they will exercise great care
in selecting conscientious and duly qualified policemen and
• Sec. 3. (1) The privacy of communication and
exercise supervision over them in the performance of their
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon
duties as peace officers.
lawful order of the court, or wh

HUMAN DIGNITY
• Sec. 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the
• Examination of the torts involving the right of a
same within the limits prescribed by law shall not
person to:
be impaired except upon lawful order of the court.
– Dignity
Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except
33
 in the interest of national security, public safety, or
public health, as may be provided by law. x x x xx 2. the need to reduce, if not totally eradicate, fraudulent
transactions and misrepresentations by persons seeking
Sec. 8. The right of the people, including those employed basic services.
in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations,
or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be It is debatable whether the interests are compelling enough
abridged. to warrant the issuance of the said order. The broadness,
vagueness, and overbreadth of A.O. No. 308 which if
Sec. 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against implemented will put our people’s right to privacy in clear
himself.” and present danger. In the case at bar, the threat comes
from which by issuing A.O. No. 308 pressures the people to
PRIVACY surrender their privacy by giving information about
• The United States Supreme Court has also fashioned themselves on the pretext that it will facilitate delivery of
a limited constitutional right basic services.
• The Court has acknowledged that the rights
contained in the Bill of Rights imply a right for a Petition is granted. A.O. No. 308 is unconstitutional.
citizen to be free from government intrusion into the
most intimate family matters. Case:Ilusio Vs Bildner
• In the Philippines, the right to be let alone is likewise • The Supreme Court expressed the view that the
a constitutional right. In a recent decision, the constitutional right of privacy may be violated if
Supreme Court considered the right to privacy as the court will force a person to let other people
one of the fundamental constitutional rights. have access to him
Case: Pollo Vs Constantino-David
REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY
• The Court has ruled that in passing laws and rules, Facts:
adequate safeguards should be mantained regarding • An anonymous letter-complaint was received by
people’s reasonable expectation of privacy. the respondent Civil Service Commission
Chairperson alleging that an officer of the CSC has
Case: Blas Ople Vs Torres been lawyering for public officials with pending
cases in the CSC. Chairperson David immediately
Facts: A.O. No. 308 was issued by President Fidel V. Ramos formed a team with background in information
on December 12, 1996 for the Adoption of a National technology and issued a memorandum directing
Computerized Identification Reference System. It was them “to back up all the files in the computers
published in four newspapers of general circulation on found in the [CSC-ROIV] Mamamayan Muna
January. Petitioner filed the instant petition against (PALD) and Legal divisions.”
respondents, on the grounds that:
• The team proceeded at once to the office and
1. it is a usurpation of the power of Congress to legislate, backed up all files in the hard disk of computers at
2. it impermissibly intrudes on our citizenry’s protected zone the PALD and the Legal Services Division. Within
of privacy. the same day, the investigating team finished the
task. It was found that most of the files copied
from the computer assigned to and being used by
Issue: Whether there is a violation of the Right to Privacy as the petitioner were draft pleadings or letters in
enshrined in the Bill of Rights. connection with administrative cases in the CSC
and other tribunals. Chairperson David thus issued
Held: The essence of privacy is the “right to be left alone.” a Show-Cause Order requiring the petitioner to
The right to privacy as such is accorded recognition submit his explanation or counter-affidavit within
independently of its identification with liberty; in itself, it is five days from notice.
fully deserving of constitutional protection.
• Petitioner denied that he is the person referred to
The Court prescind from the premise that the right to privacy in the anonymous letter-complaint. He asserted
is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution, hence, that he had protested the unlawful taking of his
it is the burden of government to show that A.O. No. 308 is computer done while he was on leave, and that the
justified by some compelling state interest and that it is files in his computer were his personal files and
narrowly drawn. A.O. No. 308 is predicated on two those of his relatives and associates, and that he is
considerations: not authorize the activities as they are in violation
of his constitutional right to privacy and protection
1. the need to provides our citizens and foreigners with the against self-incrimination and warrantless search
facility to conveniently transact business with basic service and seizure. Also, the files/documents copied from
and social security providers and other government his computer without his consent are inadmissible
instrumentalities and ; as evidence, being “fruits of a poisonous tree.”

34
 • The CSC found prima facie case against the Even conceding for a moment that there is no such
petitioner and charged him with Dishonesty, Grave administrative policy, there is no doubt in the mind of the
Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest Commission that the search of Pollo’s computer has
of the Service and Violation of R.A. No. 6713 (Code successfully passed the test of reasonableness for
of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials warrantless searches in the workplace. It bears emphasis
and Employees). On 24 July 2007, the CSC issued a that the Commission pursued the search in its capacity as a
Resolution finding petitioner GUILTY of the same government employer and that it was undertaken in
merits and meted the penalty of DISMISSAL FROM connection with an investigation involving a work-related
THE SERVICE with all its accessory penalties. This misconduct, one of the circumstances exempted from the
Resolution was also brought to the CA by herein warrant requirement. The nature of the imputation was
petitioner. serious, as it was grievously disturbing. If, indeed, a CSC
employee was found to be furtively engaged in the practice
• By a Decision dated 11 October 2007, the CA of “lawyering” for parties with pending cases before the
dismissed the petitioner’s petition for certiorari after Commission would be a highly repugnant scenario, then
finding no grave abuse of discretion committed by such a case would have shattering repercussions. It is
respondents CSC officials. His motion for settled that a court or an administrative tribunal must not
reconsideration having been denied by the CA, only be actually impartial but must be seen to be so,
petitioner brought this appeal before the Supreme otherwise the general public would not have any trust and
Court. confidence in it. Considering the damaging nature of the
accusation, the Commission had to act fast, if only to arrest
Issue: Whether or not the search conducted and the copying or limit any possible adverse consequence or fall-out.
of petitioner’s files without his knowledge and consent lawful?
Thus, petitioner’s claim of violation of his constitutional
Held: right to privacy must necessarily fail. His other argument
Yes. The right to privacy has been accorded recognition in this invoking the privacy of communication and correspondence
jurisdiction as a facet of the right protected by the guarantee under Section 3(1), Article III of the 1987 Constitution is
against unreasonable search and seizure under Section 2, also untenable considering the recognition accorded to
Article III of the 1987 Constitution. The constitutional certain legitimate intrusions into the privacy of employees
guarantee is not a prohibition of all searches and seizures but in the government workplace under the aforecited
only of “unreasonable” searches and seizures. authorities. We likewise find no merit in his contention that
O’Connor and Simons are not relevant because the present
Applying the analysis and principles announced in O’Connor case does not involve a criminal offense like child
and Simons for warrantless searches involving public pornography. As already mentioned, the search of
employees for work related reasons to the case at bar, we petitioner’s computer was justified there being reasonable
now address the following questions: (1) Did petitioner have ground for suspecting that the files stored therein would
a reasonable expectation of privacy in his office and computer yield incriminating evidence relevant to the investigation
files? (2) Was the search authorized by the CSC Chair being conducted by CSC as government employer of such
reasonable in its inception and scope? misconduct subject of the anonymous complaint. This
situation clearly falls under the exception to the warrantless
The petitioner had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his requirement in administrative searches defined in O’Connor.
office and computer files for he failed to prove that he had an
actual expectation of privacy either in his office or PROTECTION OF PRIVACY UNDER RULES AND
government-issued computer which contained his personal STATUTES
files.
The Revised Penal Code makes a crime:
He did not allege that he had a separate enclosed office which - the violation of secrets by an officer
he did not share with anyone, or that his office was always - revelation of trade and industrial secrets
locked and not open to other employees or visitors. He did - trespass to dwelling
not use passwords nor adopted any means to prevent access
by others of his computer files. The CSC also implemented a The Rules of Court
policy which implies on-the-spot inspections may be done to - provisions on privileged communications
ensure that the computer resources were used only for such
legitimate business purposes. SPECIAL LAWS
 Anti Wiretapping Law
The search authorized by the respondent CSC Chair was  Secrecy of Bank Deposits Act
reasonable since it was conducted in connection with  Intellectual Property Code
investigation of work-related misconduct. A search by a  violation of the constitutional right to privacy
government employer of an employee’s office is justified  that causes damage to another makes the actor
when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that it will liable under Art. 32, NCC
turn up evidence that the employee is guilty of work-related  The Rules on the Writ of Habeas Data issued by
misconduct. the Supreme Court likewise protects the right to
privacy
35
  Congress passed RA NO 10173 otherwise known as • Each is entitled to a liberty of choice as to his
the “Data Privacy Act of 2012” manner of life, and neither an individual nor the
public has the right to arbitrarily take away from
FACETS OF PRIVACY him his liberty
PRIVACY IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL SPHERE: • Publicity in one instance and privacy in the other is
1. Privacy in a physical sense each guaranteed. If personal liberty embraces the
2. Privacy in an informational sense right of publicity, it no less embraces the
3. Proprietary privacy correlative right of privacy
4. Privacy in a decisional sense
LIBERTARIAN JUSTIFICATION
BASIS OF LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES\
• In John Stuart Mill’s work “On Liberty,” the
appropriately private sphere is the domain of what
VIOLATION OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY THAT CAUSES he termed as “self-regarding” and “purely
DAMAGE TO ANOTHER MAKES THE ACTOR LIABLE: personal” conduct.
- Under Article 32 of the Civil Code • Accdg. to Mill, people should be left alone if the
- Constitution conduct is self-regarding
- Deprivation of due process
- Violation of the right against unreasonable OPINIONS REJECTING THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY
searches and seizure • It should be noted, however, that there are those
- Privacy of communication and who do not recognize the right to privacy as an
correspondence independent right
• In England, the right to privacy is not recognized
VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY AS • Others are reluctant to recognize the right to
INDEPENDENT TORT privacy because they believe that the interest of
free speech and the importance of disseminating
DEVELOPMENT AS TORT the truth about things and people weigh heavily
The development of violation of right to privacy as tort against the invasion of privacy
started in the United States with the seminal article of • Observer of the social scene and Justice Romero
Warren and Brandeis published in Harvard Law Journal in noted that the word privacy is not even in the
1890 entitled “Right to Privacy.” dictionary of Filipinos
• The concept and practice of privacy are missing
In 1960, another influential article was published from conventional Filipino life.
regarding privacy, that is, the article of Dean Prosser • Many Filipinos believe that the privacy is an
which analyzed different cases involving privacy and unnecessary imposition
classified them into four types of invasion namely:
1) intrusion upon plaintiff’s seclusion or solitude STANDARD USED IN DETERMINING TORT
2) public disclosure of private embarrassing facts LIABILITY
3) publicity that places one in a bad light • The standard to be applied in determining if there
4) appropriation, for the defendant’s advantage of the was violation of the right is that of a person of
plaintiff’s name or likeness. ordinary sensibilities. It is relative to customs of
time and place and is determined by the norm of
PERSONS ENTITLED TO RELIEF an ordinary person.
The right to privacy can be invoked only by natural
persons because the basis of the right to privacy is an CLASSIFICATION OF TORT OF VIOLATION OF THE
injury to the feelings and sensibilities of the party. RIGHT TO PRIVACY
• The CA explained that the right to privacy, in
Purely personal in nature and may be invoked only by the determining if there is cause of action for damages
person whose privacy is claimed to have been violated. is when
 ◦ May be waived – There exists an unwarranted invasion of
 ◦ ceases upon the death of the person. such right
– Whether it may be protected by injunctive
RATIONALE FOR PRIVACY relief
- It covers many aspects of a person’s life – Right to be left alone
- It protects solitude • live a life of seclusion
- Allows independence • free from unwarranted
- Encompasses right to self-determination interference by the public
- Central to dignity and individuality or personhood • protected from any wrongful
- Indispensable to a sense of autonomy intrusion

FOUR TYPES OF VIOLATION OF PRIVACY

NATURAL LAW JUSTIFICATION
RECOGNIZED IN OUR JURISDICTION:
1) intrusion
36
 2) publication of private facts injunction to restrain the petitioners from proceeding with
3) making one appear before the public in an the administrative investigation for which the judge granted
objectionable false light by issuing a decision perpetually enjoining the petitioners
4) commercial appropriation of likeness of another from further proceeding with the administrative
investigation
INTRUSION
◦ protect a person's sense of locational and psychological Issue: Whether or not the school through its duly
privacy authorized representative has the jurisdiction to investigate
◦ forms of intrusion: its student or students for an alleged misconduct
▪ prying into the privacy of another's residence (Art. committedoutside the school premises and beyond school
26 (a), NCC) hours?
▪ criminal trespass (Art. 280, RPC)
Ruling: Yes. A college or any school for that matter, has a
INTRUSION IN PUBLIC PLACES
dual responsibility to its students. One is to provide
opportunities for learning and the other is to help them
GR:there is no invasion of the right to privacy when a growand develop into mature, responsible, effective and
journalist records, photographs, or writes about something worthy citizens of the community. Discipline is one of the
that occurs in public places. means to carry out the second responsibility.

Except: when such constitutes harassment or overzealous The judge correctly stated that the general rule is that the
shadowing. authority of the school is co-extensive with its territorial
jurisdiction, or its school grounds, so that any action taken
PERSONS PROTECTED: for acts committed outside the school premises should, in
- The law protects everyone, not just public figures general, be left to the policeauthorities, the courts of
justice, and the family concerned.
INTRUSION AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
- The Constitution protects freedom of the press
However, this rule is not rigid or one without exceptions. It
- Integral to such right is the right to be freely
is the better view that there are instances when the school
involved in newsgathering
might be called upon to exercise its power over its student
- If the story concerns a matter of public interest,
or students for acts committed outside the school and
the question becomes whether its newsworthiness outweighs
beyond school hours in the following:a) In cases of
the privacy interest of the individual plaintiff
violations of school policies or regulations occurring in
connection with a school sponsored activity off-campus; or
INTRUSION IN ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION
b) In cases where the misconduct of the student involves
- There is no intrusion when an employer investigates
his status as a student or affects the good name or
its employee or when a school investigates its
reputation of the school. There can be no doubt that the
student.
establishment of an educational institution requires rules
- Investigation may cover an alleged offense
and regulations necessary for the maintenance of an orderly
committed outside school premises
educational program and the creation of an educational
environment conducive to learning. Such rules
Case: Angeles Vs. Sison andregulations are equally necessary for the protection of
the students, faculty, and property.
Facts: In November 1975, the petitioner Jose Angeles, a
professor of the Institute of Technology of the Far Easter INTRUSION IN COMMON CARRIERS
University file an administrative case against his twostudents:  Common carriers are required by law to exercise
Edgardo Picar and Wilfredo Patawaran before the office of extraordinary diligence in ensuring the safety of its
Gilberto G.Mercado passengers. Consequently, it has the duty to make
sure that no dangerous objects are brought inside
Dean of the Institute for allegedly assaulting him at the Oak the vehicle
Barrel Restaurant ocated outside the campus.Dean Mercado,
taking action on the complaint filed by Angeles, immediately Case: Nocum Vs Laguna Tayabas Bus Company
created a committee headed by him to investigate the
complaint.
Facts: Appellee (Nocum), who was a passenger in
appellant's (Laguna Tayabas Bus Co.) Bus No. 120 then
The two respondents, Picar and Patawaran questioned the making a trip within the barrio of Dita, Municipality of Bay,
authority of Mercado and his committee to conduct an Laguna, was injured as a consequence of the explosion of
investigation on the basis of jurisdiction since the incident firecrackers, contained in a box, loaded in said bus. A total
happened outside the premises of the university campus. The of 37 passengers were injured. The bus conductor testified
respondents filed before the Court of First Instance of Manila that the box belonged to a passenger whose name he does
a complaint with petition for issuance of writ of preliminary not know and who told him that it contained miscellaneous
37
items and clothes. He also said that from its appearance there (International School Alliance of Educators vs. Quisumbing,
was no indication at all that the contents were explosives or G.R. No. 128846, June 1, 2000).
firecrackers. Neither did he open the box because he just
relied on the word of theowner. Thus, existing statutes recognize different forms of
discrimination. The Labor Code expressly disallows
discrimination of women in the workplace (Article 135,
Dispatcher Nicolas Cornista added that they were not
Labor Code); the Magna Carta for Disa- bled Persons
authorized to open the baggages of passengers because
likewise expressly prohibits discrimination of disabled
instruction from the management was to call the police if
persons; Republic Act No. 8504 makes one liable for
there were packages containing articles which were against
discrimination of “AIDS” victims (Sections 35-42); and
regulations. The trial court's decision is that appellant(LTBC)
Republic Act No. 8972 prohibits discrimination of solo
did not observe the extraordinary or utmost diligence of a
parents (Section 7, Solo Parents Act).
very cautious person as required by the articles 1733, 1755,
& 1756 of the Civil Code. Hence, this case.
Discrimination in Labor
The law on discrimination against women is reinforced by
Issue: Whether or not Laguna Tayabas Bus Co. failed to
Article 135 of the Labor Code. The said statute states that it
exercise extraordinary diligence.
shall be unlawful for any employer to discriminate against
any woman employee with respect to terms and conditions
Ruling: NO. Article 1755 provides: "A common carrier is of employment solely on account of her sex.
bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care
and foresight canprovide, using the utmost diligence of very
The law identifies two examples of acts of discrimination:
cautious persons, with due regard for all the circumstances."
1) Payment of a lesser compensation, including wage,
salary or other form of remuneration and fringe
Fairness demands that in measuring a common carrier's duty benefits to a female employee as against a male
towards its passengers, allowance must be given to the employee, for work of value; and
reliance that should be reposed on the sense of responsibility 2) favoring a male employee over female employee
of all the passengers in regard to their common safety. It is to with respect to promotion, training opportunities,
be presumed that a passenger will not take with him anything study and scholarship grants solely on account of
dangerous to the lives and limbs of his co-passengers, not to their sexes.
speak of his own. Not to be lightly considered must be the
right to privacy to which each passenger is entitled. He Discrimination of Disabled
cannot be subjected to any unusual search, when he protests
the innocuousness of his baggage and nothing appears to
Discrimination of disabled persons is expressly prohibited in
indicate the contrary, as in the case at bar. In other words,
Republic Act No. 7277 otherwise known as “Magna Carta for
inquiry may be verbally made as to the nature of a
Disabled Persons.”
passenger's baggage when such is not outwardly perceptible,
but beyond this, constitutional boundaries are already
indanger of being transgressed. Since We hold that appellant Section 32 provides that no entity, whether public or
has succeeded in rebutting the presumption of negligence by private shall discriminate against a quali ed disabled person
showing that it has exercised extraordinary diligence for the by reason of dis- ability in regard to job application
safety of its passengers, "according to the circumstances of procedures, the hiring, promotion, or discharge of
the (each) case", We deem it unnecessary to rule whether or employees, employee compensation, job training, and other
not there was any fortuitous event in this case. The appealed terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The
judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case is following acts are identifed to be discriminatory:
dismissed.
a) Limiting, segregating or classifying a disabled job
DISCRIMINATION applicant in such a manner that adversely affects his work
Different forms of discrimination are expressly prohibited opportunities;
under the existing laws in this jurisdiction. Public policy
abhors discrimination — a policy that is reflected in our b) Using qualification standards, employment tests or other
Constitution and statutes. (Sec- tion 1, Art. XIII and Article selection criteria that screen out or tend to screen out a
19 of the New Civil Code). International law, which springs disabled person unless such standards, tests or other
from general principles of law likewise proscribes selection criteria are shown to be job-related for the
discrimination. Among the treaties that can be invoked are position in question and are consistent with business
the Uni- versal Declaration of Human Rights, the International necessity;
Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the
International Convention on the Elements of All Forms of c) Utilizing standards, criteria, or methods of administration
Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Discrimination that:
in Education and the Convention (No. 111) Concerning 1) Have the effect of discrimination on the basis of
Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation. disability; or

38
 2) perpetuate the discrimination of others who are other opportunity that is as effective as that provided to
subject to common administrative control. others.

d) Providing less compensation, such as salary, wage, or Section 34 provides that “it shall be considered discrimina-
other forms of remuneration and fringe benefits, to a qualified tion for franchisees or operators and personnel of sea, land,
disabled employee, by reason of his disability, than the and air transportation facilities to charge higher fare or to
amount to which a non-disabled person performing the same refuse to convey a passenger, his orthopedic devices,
work is entitled; personal effects, and merchandize by reason of his
disability.”
Section 35 of the law enumerates all the establishments
e) Favoring a non-disabled employee over a qualified disabled
that are considered public accommodations or services.
employee with respect to promotion, training opportuni- ties,
Examples of such establishments are hotels, inns, motel,
study and scholarship grants, solely on account of the latter’s
restaurants, theater, place of gathering like a convention
disability;
center, bakery, grocery store, bank, barbershop, museum,
park, schools, or place of exercise.
f) Re-assigning or transferring a disabled employee to a job
or position he cannot perform by reason of his disability; SEXUAL HARASSMENT

g) Dismissing or terminating the services of a disabled In the Philippines, the special law on sexual harassment,
employee by reason of his disability unless the employer can Repub- lic Act No. 7877 (otherwise known as the “Anti-
prove that he impairs the satisfactory performance of the Sexual Harassment Act of 1995”) was passed only in
work involved to the prejudice of the business entity; February, 1995.
Provided, however, That the employer rst sought to provide
reasonable accommodations for disabled persons;
It contains the following declaration of policy:
• Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. — The State shall
h) Failing to select or administer in the most effective manner value the dignity of every individual, enhance the
employment tests which accurately re ect the skills, aptitute development of its human resources, guarantee
or other factor of the disabled applicant or employee that full respect for human rights, and uphold the
such tests purports to measure, rather than the impaired dignity of workers, employees, applicants for
sensory, manual or speaking skills of such applicant or employment, students or those undergoing
employee, if any; and training, instruction or education. Towards this
end, all forms of sexual harassment in the employ-
i) Excluding disabled persons from membership in labor ment, education or training environment are
unions or similar organizations. hereby declared unlawful.

Q: Who can commit sexual harassment?

The following acts constitute acts of discrimination
A: Section 3 of R.A. No. 7877 provides that work, education
under Section 36:
or training-related sexual harassment is committed by an
employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the
1) denying a disabled person, directly or through contractual, employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or
licensing, or other arrangement, the opportunity to participate any other person who, having authority, in uence or moral
in or bene t from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, ascendancy over another in a work or training or education
advantages, or accommodations of an entity by reason of his environment.
disability;
Principal by Inducement

2) affording a disable person, on the basis of his disabilty,  Any person who directs or induces another to
directly or through contractual, licensing or other commit any act of sexual harassment as herein
arrangement, with the opportunity to participate in or bene t defined, or who cooperates in the commission
from a good or service, facility, privilege, advantage, or thereof by another without which it would not have
accommodation that is not equal to that afforded to other been committed, shall also be held liable under the
able-bodied persons; and Act. (Sec. 3).

Employer or Head of Office

3) providing a disabled person, on the basis of his dis- ability, • “the employer or head of office, educational or
directly or through contractual, licensing, or other training institution shall be solidarily liable for
arrangement, with a good service, facility, advantage, damages arising from the acts of sexual
privilege, or accommodation that is different or separate from harassment committed in the employment,
that provided to other able-bodied persons unless such action education or training environment if the employer
is necessary to provide the disable person with a good or head of office, educational or training institution
service, facility, advantage, privilege, or accommodation, or is informed of such acts by the offended party and
no immediate action is taken thereon.”

39
 Hostile environment cases
Q: How committed  Hostile environment cases, on the other hand,
A: Sexual harassment is committed whenever any of the involve the allegation that employees or students
persons mentioned in paragraph (a) above “demands, work or study in offensive or abusive environment.
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the
other, regardless of whether the demand, request or  Section 3. For the purpose of these Rules, the
requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said administrative offense of sexual harassment is an
act.” act, or a series of acts, involving any unwelcome
sexual advance, request or demand for a sexual
Persons in SEC. A are the following: favor, or other verbal or physical behavior of a
employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the sexual nature, committed by a government
employer, teacher, in- structor, professor, coach, trainor, or employee or offcial in a work-related, training or
any other person who, having authority, in uence or moral education related environment of the person
ascendancy over another in a work or training or education complained of.
environment
Work-related sexual harassment is committed under
Section 3 (a) provides that in a work-related or the following circumstances:
employment environment, sexual harassment is
committed when: (1) submission to or rejection of the act or series of acts is
(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring used as a basis for any employment decision (including, but
or in the employment, re-employment or continued not limited to, matters related to hiring, promotion, raise in
employment of said individual, or in granting said salary, job security, benefits and any other personnel
individual favorable compensation, terms, conditions, action) affecting the applicant/employee; or
promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant the
sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or (2) the act or series of acts have the purpose or effect of
classifying the employee which in any way would interfering with the complainants’ work performance, or
discriminate, deprive or diminish employment creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work
opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said environment; or
employee;
(2) The above acts would impair the employee’s rights (3) the act or series of acts might reasonably be expected
or privileges under existing labor laws; or to cause discrimination, insecurity, discomfort, offense or
(3) The above acts would result in an intimidating, humiliation to a complainant who may be a co-employee,
hostile, or offensive environment for the employee. applicant, customer, or ward of the person complained of.
On the other hand, sexual harassment in an education or Education or training-related sexual harassment is
training environment is committed under Section 3(b): committed against one who is under the actual or
(4) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the constructive care, custody or supervision of the offender, or
giving of a passing grade, or the granting of honors against one whose education, training, apprenticeship,
and scholar- ships or the payment of a stipend, internship or tutorship is directly or constructively entrusted
allowance or other benefits, privileges, or to, or is provided by, the offender, when:
considerations; or
(5) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, (1) submission to or rejection of the act or series of acts is
hostile or offensive environment for the student, used as a basis for any decision affecting the com- plainant,
trainee or apprentice. including, but not limited to, the giving or a grade, the
granting of honors or a scholarship, the payment of a
stipend or allowance, or the giving of any bene t, privilege
Quid pro quo cases or consideration.
Sexual favors are elicited in return for something else.
(2) the act or series of acts have the purpose or effect of
Examples: interfering with the performance, or creating an
1. sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the intimidating, hostile or offensive academic environment of
employment, re-employment or continued employment of the complainant; or
said individual, or in granting said individual favorable
compensation, terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges (3) the act or series of acts might reasonably be expected
to cause discrimination, insecurity, discomfort, offense or
2. the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a humiliation to a complainant who may be a trainee,
passing grade, or the granting of honors and scholarships or apprentice, intern, tutee or ward of the person complained
the payment of a stipend, allowance or other bene ts, of.
privileges or considerations.
Section 4. Sexual harassment may take place:
1. in the premises of the workplace or of ce or of the school
3. the refusal to grant sexual favor “would impair the
or training institution;
employee’s right or privileges under existing labor law.”

40
2. in any place where the parties were found as a result of petitioner that a medical group from Texas, U.S.A., was
work or education or training responsibilities or relations; coming to town in December to look into putting up a clinic
in Lapasan, Cagayan de Oro, where she might be
3. at work or education or training-related social func- tions; considered. On 01 December 1995, around nine o’clock in
the morning, she and her father went back to the office of
4. while on of cial business outside the of ce or school or petitioner. The latter informed her that there was a vacancy
training institution or during work or school or training-related in a family planning project for the city and that, if she were
travel; interested, he could interview her for the job. Petitioner
then started putting up to her a number of questions. When
5. at of cial conferences, fora, symposia, or training sessions; asked at one point whether or not she already had a
or boyfriend, she said “no.” Petitioner suggested that perhaps
if her father were not around, she could afford to be honest
6. by telephone, cellular phone, fax machine or electronic in her answers to the doctor. The father, taking the cue,
mail. decided to leave. Petitioner then inquired whether she was
still a virgin, explaining to her his theory on the various
Section 5. The following are illustrative forms of sexual aspects of virginity. He “hypothetically” asked whether she
harassment: would tell her family or friends if a male friend happened to
intimately touch her. Petitioner later offered her the job
(a) Physical where she would be the subject of a “research” program.
• Malicious Touching, She was requested to be back after lunch.
• Overt sexual advances,
• Gestures with lewd insinuation. While driving, petitioner casually asked her if she already
(b) Verbal, such as but not limited to requests or demands took her bath, and she said she was so in a hurry that she
for sexual favors, and lurid remarks, did not find time for it. Petitioner then inquired whether she
(c) Use of objects, pictures or graphics, letters or written had varicose veins, and she said “no.” Petitioner told her to
notes with sexual underpinnings, raise her foot and lower her pants so that he might confirm
(d) Other forms analogous to the foregoing. it. She felt assured that it was all part of the research.
Petitioner still pushed her pants down to her knees and held
her thigh. He put his hands inside her panty until he
It is readily noticeable that the presence of sexual advances
reached her pubic hair. Surprised, she exclaimed “hala ka!”
Discr Requisites:
and instinctively pulled her pants up. Petitioner then
touched her abdomen with his right hand saying words of
(1) that he or she was subjected to sexual advances, endearment and letting the back of his palm touch her
requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or forehead. He told her to raise her shirt to check whether
physical conduct of sexual nature, she had nodes or lumps. She hesitated for a while but,
(2) that this conduct was unwelcome, and eventually, raised it up to her navel. Petitioner then fondled
(3) that the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive her breast. Shocked at what petitioner did, she lowered her
to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment shirt and embraced her bag to cover herself, telling him
and create an abusive working environment. angrily that she was through with the research. He begged
her not to tell anybody about what had just happened.
Standard of Conduct Before she alighted from the car, petitioner urged her to
the determination of the standard to be used in determining if reconsider her decision to quit. He then handed over to her
the plaintiff found the environment offensive. The weight of P300.00 for her expenses.
authority is to use the standard of a “reasonable man” that is
used in negligence cases. Under this view, the environment is Petitioner contradicted the testimony of Juliet Yee. He
hostile if a person of ordinary prudence would not have been claimed that on 28 November 1995 he had a couple of
engaged in the allegedly harassing conduct. people who went to see him in his office, among them,
Juliet and her father, Pat. Justin Yee, who was a boyhood
Case: Dr. Rico S. Jacutin V People Of The Philippines friend. When it was their turn to talk to petitioner, Pat. Yee
G.R. No. 140604, March 6, 2002 introduced his daughter Juliet who expressed her wish to
Facts: Juliet Q. Yee, then a 22-year old fresh graduate of join the City Health Office. Petitioner replied that there was
nursing, averred that on 28 November 1995 her father no vacancy in his office, adding that only the City Mayor
accompanied her to the office of petitioner at the City Health really had the power to appoint city personnel. On 01
Office to seek employment. Juliet’s father and petitioner were December 1995, the afternoon when the alleged incident
childhood friends. Juliet was informed by the doctor that the happened, he was in a meeting with the Committee on
City Health Office had just then filled up the vacant positions Awards in the Office of the City Mayor. On 04 December
for nurses but that he would still see if he might be able to 1995, when Juliet said she went to his office to return the
help her. P300.00, he did not report to the office for he was
scheduled to leave for Davao at 2:35 p.m. to attend a
The following day, 29 November 1995, Juliet and her father hearing before the Office of the Ombudsman for Mindanao.
returned to the City Health Office, and they were informed by He submitted in evidence a photocopy of his plane ticket.
He asserted that the complaint for sexual harassment, as
41
well as all the other cases led against him by Vivian Yu, Iryn "The Long Dark Night in Negros" subtitled "The Moises
Salcedo, Mellie Villanueva and Pamela Rodis, were but forms Padilla Story".
of political harassment directed at him.
The book narrates the events which culminated in the
Ruling: The contentions of petitioner are not meritorious.
murder of Moises Padilla who was then a mayoralty
Section 3 of Republic Act 7877 provides:
candidate of the Nacionalista Party for the Municipality of
Magallon, Negros Occidental, during the November, 1951
Petitioner was the City Health Officer of Cagayan de Oro City, elections. Governor Rafael Lacson, a member of the Liberal
a position he held when complainant, a newly graduated Party then in power and his men were tried and convicted
nurse, saw him to enlist his help in her desire to gain for that murder. In the book, Moises Padilla is portrayed as
employment. He did try to show an interest in her plight, her "a martyr in contemporary political history."
father being a boyhood friend, but nding no opening suitable
for her in his office, he asked her about accepting a job in a
Although the emphasis of the movie was on the public life
family planning research project.
of Moises Padilla, there were portions which dealt with his
private and family life including the portrayal in some
While the City Mayor had the exclusive prerogative in
scenes, of his mother, Maria Soto Vda. de Gonzales, private
appointing city personnel, it should stand to reason,
respondent herein, and of one "Auring" as his girlfriend.
nevertheless, that a recommendation from petitioner in the
appointment of personnel in the municipal health of- ce could
carry good weight. Indeed, petitioner himself would appear to On October 5, 1961, Mrs. Nelly Amante, half-sister of
have conveyed, by his words and actions, an impression that Moises Padilla, for and in behalf of her mother, private
he could facilitate Juliet’s employment. Indeed, petitioner respondent, demanded in writing for certain changes,
would not have been able to take undue liberalities on the corrections and deletions in the movie.
person of Juliet had it not been for his high posi- tion in the
City Health Of ce of Cagayan de Oro City. The ndings of the On the same date, October 5, 1961, after some bargaining,
Sandiganbayan were bolstered by the testimony of Vivian Yu, the petitioner and private respondent executed a “Licensing
petitioner’s secretary between 1979 to 1994, of Iryn Lago Agreement” where the petitioner agreed to pay the private
Salcedo, Public Health Nurse II, and of Farah Dongallo y respondent the sum of P20,000.00 payable without need of
Alkuino, a city health nurse, all of whom were said to have further demand, as follows: P5,000.00 on or before Oct. 10,
likewise been victims of perverse behavior by petitioner. 1961; P10,000.00 on or before Oct. 31, 1961; and
P5,000.00 on or before November 30, 1961. Also the
FALSE LIGHT Licensor (private respondent) grants authority and
The interest to be protected in this tort is the interest of the permission to Licensee (Petitioner) to exploit, use, and
individual in not being made to appear before the public in an develop the life story of Moises Padilla for purposes of
objectionable false light or false position. producing the PICTURE, and in connection with matters
incidental to said production, such as advertising and the
False light V. Defamation like, as well as authority and permission for the use of
False light – The gravamen of the claim is the LICENSOR's name in the PICTURE and have herself
embarrassment of a person in being made into portrayed therein, the authority and permission hereby
something he is not. granted, to retroact to the date when LICENSEE first
Defamation - The gravamen of the claim is committed any of the acts herein authorized.
reputational harm.
False light cases – (as in publication of private
facts), the statement should be actually made public. After its premier showing on October 16, 1961, the movie
Publication in defamation – is satisfied if a letter was shown in different theaters all over the country.
is sent to a third person.
False light – the defendant may still be held liable Because petitioner refused to pay any additional amounts
even if the statements tell something good about the pursuant to the Agreement, on December 22, 1961, private
plaintiff. respondent instituted the present suit against him praying
Defamation– what is published lowers the esteem for judgment in her favor ordering petitioner 1) to pay her
in which the plaintiff is held. the amount of P15,000.00, with legal interest from the filing
of the Complaint; 2) to render an accounting of the
proceeds from the picture and to pay the corresponding 2-
Case:Manuel Lagunzad, Petitioner, Vs.Maria Soto Vda. 1/2% royalty therefrom; 3) to pay attorney's fees
De Gonzales And The Court Of Appeals, equivalent to 20% of the amounts claimed; and 4) to pay
Respondents.G.R. No. L-32066 August 6, 1979 the costs.
Petitioner contended in his Answer that the episodes in the
Facts: Sometime in August, 1961, petitioner Manuel life of Moises Padilla depicted in the movie were matters of
Lagunzad, began the production of a movie entitled "The public knowledge and was a public figure; that private
Moises Padilla Story". It was based mainly on the copyrighted respondent has no property right over those incidents; that
but unpublished book of Atty. Ernesto Rodriguez, Jr., entitled the Licensing Agreement was without valid cause or

42
consideration and that he signed the same only because of corporation and ask for 8000php for actual damages, 20000
the coercion and threat employed upon him. As a for moral damages and 2000php for attorneys fee.
counterclaim, petitioner sought for the nullification of the
Licensing Agreement as it constitutes an infringement on the
Issue: Whether St. Louis is liable to pay damages to Dr.
constitutional right of freedom of speech and of the press.
Aramil?

Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals ruled in favour of
Ruling: Yes. The case falls under Article 26 which warrants
the private respondent.
St. Louis to pay for damages. The article states that “every
person must respect the dignity, personality privacy and
Issues: Whether or not private respondent have any peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons”, “Prying
property right over the life of Moises Padilla since the latter into the privacy of another’s residence” and “Meddling with
was a public figure. or disturbing the private life or family relations of another”.
The instance case violated the article when they published
an advertisement without any permission from Dr. Aramil
Yes. While it is true that petitioner had purchased the rights
that his house will be featured and Mr. Arcadio with his
to the book entitled "The Moises Padilla Story," that did not
family depicting the ownership. Though the acts will not
dispense with the need for prior consent and authority from
constitute criminal offense, a civil action may be instituted
the deceased heirs to portray publicly episodes in said
even if no crime is involved and moral damages may be
deceased's life and in that of his mother and the members of
obtained. In addition, St. Louis was grossly negligent and
his family. As held in Schuyler v. Curtis,” a privilege may be
bad faith is present when they mix-up residences in their
given the surviving relatives of a deceased person to protect
advertisement which is widely circulated and failed to
his memory, but the privilege exists for the benefit of the
rectify and make an apology to Dr. Aramil about the
living, to protect their feelings and to prevent a violation of
incident.
their own rights in the character and memory of the
deceased."
COMMERCIAL APPROPRIATION OF LIKENESS
Being a public figure ipso facto does not automatically destroy
in toto a person's right to privacy. The right to invade a The tort of commercial appropriation of likeness has been
person's privacy to disseminate public information does not held to protect various aspects of an individual’s identity
extend to a fictional or novelized representation of a person, from commercial exploitation: name, likeness,
no matter how public a figure he or she may be. In the case achievements, identifying characteristics, actual
at bar, while it is true that petitioner exerted efforts to performances and fictitious characters created by a
present a true-to-life story of Moises Padilla, petitioner admits performer. It was even extended in one case to phrases
that he included a little romance in the film because without and other things which are associated with an individual.
it, it would be a drab story of torture and brutality.
Under this right, the unwarranted publication of a person’s
The tort may be committed by the media by distorting the name or the unauthorized use of his photograph or likeness
news report. Thus, liability may result if film or video tape is for commercial purposes is an invasion of privacy.
edited in such a way that the plaintiff is made to appear to
have committed an illegal act although he actually did not do
With respect to celebrities, however, the right of publicity is
so.
often treated as a separate right that overlaps but is
distinct from the right of privacy. It has been observed that
Case: St. Louis Realty Corporation Vs. Court Of Appeals celebrities are not interested in barring any person from
133 Scra 179 [1984] commercially appropriating their likeness. They treat their
names and likeness as property and they want to control
and profit therefrom. In invasion of privacy, damages is
Facts: On December 15, 1968 St. Louis Corp. published an
measured by the injury to feelings, emotional distress,
advertisement with a heading “where the heart belongs”
humiliation and mental anguish. On the other hand,
featuring the house of Dr. Aramil but with Arcadio and his
celebrities who file actions to protect their right to publicity
family who is not the real owner of the said house. Upon
do so to protect their economic interest. They treat their
seeing the advertisement Dr. Aramil wrote a letter to the
names and likeness as property which cannot be
Corporation stating that there was a mix-up of residence in
encroached upon by another.
their advertisement and asked the latter to reprint and rectify
it because the said advertisement humiliated him and put him
into shame as his colleagues and friends who recognized his The tort of commercial appropriation of likeness or violation
house were in a doubt of his integrity, if he is just renting his of the right of publicity was involved in Simonette de los
house, and if his wife is with another husband. On January 5, Reyes, et al. vs. Mobil Oil Philippines, Inc. (25 CAR 2s 1089
1969, St. Louis published a reprint of their advertisement but [1978]). The plaintiffs in the case were commercial models
failed to rectify it and put an apology to Dr. Aramil. Upon and winners of beauty pageants. They agreed to lend their
seeing this Dr. Aramil decided to put a complain against the services to a project of the First Lady of the Philippines and
had their pictures taken. Later, they discovered that their

43
pictures were used in the calendars of defendant corporation. together after the marriage and as of June 1948, they were
The plaintiffs sued for damages and their claim was sustained already estranged. Vicenta left for the United Stated in
by the Court of Appeals because of the violation of their right 1950. On the same year she filed a verified complaint for
to privacy. divorce against Tenchavez in the State of Nevada on the
ground of “Extreme cruelty, entirely mental in character.” A
decree of divorce, “final and absolute” was issued in open
Policy Considerations.
court by the said tribunal. She married an American, lived
with him in California, had several children with him and, on
There are at least three policy considerations behind the right 1958, acquired American Citizenship.
of publicity on the part of celebrities. On 30 July 1955, Tenchavez filed a complaint in the Court
of First Instance of Cebu, and amended on 31 May 1956,
First, the right of publicity vindicates the economic interests against Vicenta F. Escaño, her parents, Mamerto and Mena
of celebrities, enabling those whose achievements have Escaño whom he charged with having dissuaded and
imbued their identities with pecuniary value to profit from discouraged Vicenta from joining her husband, and
their fame. alienating her affections, and against the Roman Catholic
Church, for having, through its Diocesan Tribunal, decreed
the annulment of the marriage, and asked for legal
Second, the right of publicity fosters the production of
separation and one million pesos in damages. Vicenta’s
intellectual and creative works by providing the financial
parents denied that they had in any way influenced their
incentive for individuals to expend the time and resources
daughter’s acts, and counterclaimed for moral damages.
necessary to produce them.

Issue: Whether the parents of Vicenta, compelled and

Third, the right of publicity serves both individual and societal
induced their daughter to assent to the celebration of the
interests by preventing what our legal tradition regards as
latters marriage and whether it constitutes an alienation of
wrongful misconduct: unjust enrichment and deceptive trade
affection.
practices.

Ruling:No. There is no evidence that the parents of

Personal Right
Vicenta, out of improper motives, aided and abetted her
original suit for annulment, or her subsequent divorce; she
The right to privacy is a personal right. Consequently, a appears to have acted independently and being of age, she
person is entitled to enter into a licensing agreement so that was entitled to judge what was best for her and ask that
his life can be depicted in film. her decisions be respected. Her parents, in so doing,
certainly can not be charged with alienation of affections in
There would be invasion of privacy if person film’s another’s the absence of malice or unworthy motives, which have not
life or the life of a deceased without his consent or the been shown, good faith being always presumed until the
consent of the relatives as the case may be. contrary is proved.

“Sec. 529. Liability of Parents, Guardians or kin. — The law

INTERFERENCE WITH FAMILY AND OTHER RELATIONS distinguishes between the right of a parent to interest
himself in the marital affairs of his child and the absence of
The Family Code imposes on the spouses the obligation to live right in a stranger to intermeddle in such affairs. However,
together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and such distinction between the liability of parents and that of
render mutual help and support. (Article 68). Interference strangers is only in regard to what will justify interference.
with such obligations may result in tort liability known as A parent is liable for alienation of affections resulting from
alienation of affection. Alienation of affection consists of his own malicious conduct, as where he wrongfully entices
depriving one spouse of the affection, society, companionship his son or daughter to leave his or her spouse, but he is not
and comfort of the other. liable unless he acts maliciously, without justification and
from unworthy motives. He is not liable where he acts and
advises his child in good faith with respect to his child’s
The gist of the tort is an interference with one spouse’s
marital relations, in the interest of his child as he sees it,
mental attitude toward the other and the conjugal kindness of
the marriage of his child not terminating his right and
marital relations resulting in some actual conduct which
liberty to interest himself in, and be extremely solicitous
materially affects it.
for, his child’s welfare and happiness, even where his
conduct and advice suggest or result in the separation of
Case: Tenchavez Vs. Escaño G.R. No. L-19671, the spouses or the obtaining of a divorce or annulment, or
November 29, 1965 where he acts under mistake or misinformation, or where
his advice or interference are indiscreet or unfortunate,
Facts: Vicenta Escaño, 27, exchanged marriage vows with although it has been held that the parent is liable for
Pastor Tenchavez, 32, on February 24, 1948, before a consequences resulting from recklessness. He may in good
Catholic chaplain. The marriage was duly registered with the faith take his child into his home and afford him or her
local civil registrar. However, the two were unable to live protection and support, so long as he has not maliciously
44
enticed his child away, or does not maliciously entice or cause
him or her to stay away, from his or her spouse. This rule has Distinguished from defamation.
more frequently been applied in the case of advice given to a
The Supreme Court distinguished defamation from
VEXATION AND HUMILIATION “emotional distress” by saying that primarily, an “emotional
distress” tort action is personal in nature, i.e., it is a civil
The fourth paragraph of Article 26 makes one liable for vexing action filed by an individual to assuage the injuries to his
or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, emotional tranquility due to personal attacks on his
lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other character. Emotional distress properly belongs to the
personal condition. reactive harm principle while defamation calls for the
application of the relational harm principle. The principle of
Consequently, discrimination against a person on account of relational harm includes harm to social relationships in the
his physical defect, which causes emotional distress, may community in the form of defamation as distinguished from
result in liability on the part of the offending party. Sexual the principle of reactive harm which includes injuries to
harassment also falls under this category based on violation individual emotional tranquility.
of a woman’s right to privacy. Public humiliation due to lowly
station in life may likewise result in liability. For example, a Republic Act No. 4200 “An act to Prohibit and
department store manager who searched a person in public Penalize Wire-Tapping and other related violations of the
for no other reason than the fact that such person looked privacy of communication, and for other purposes”
poor will be held liable for damages.

Things to remember: It is unlawful for any person

Social equality is not sought by the legal provision under
(whether a party to the conversation or not), not being
consideration, but due regard for decency and propriety.
authorized by all parties to any private communication (this
includes conversation) or spoken word, to:
INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
– Tap any wire or cable, or
“Emotional distress” means any highly unpleasant mental
– Using other device or arrangement to
reaction such as extreme grief, shame, humiliation,
secretly
embarrassment, anger, disappointment, worry, nausea,
• Overhear, intercept or record
mental suffering and anguish, shock, fright, horror, and
such communication or spoken
chagrin.
word by using;
– Dictaphone or
Any party seeking recovery for mental anguish must prove
dictagraph or
more than mere worry, anxiety, vexation, embarrassment, or
dectaphone or walkie-
anger. Liability does not arise from mere insults, indignities,
talkie or tape recorder
threats, annoyances, petty expressions, or other trivialities.
(Sec. 1, 1st paragraph)
In determining whether the tort of outrage had been
–
committed, a plaintiff is necessarily expected and required to
Q: Is the use of telephone extension punishable?
be hardened to a certain amount of criticism, rough language,
A: No. In the case of Gaanan vs IAC, telephone
and to occasional acts and words that are definitely
extension is not one of the devices enumerated in Sec. 1 of
inconsiderate and unkind; the mere fact that the actor knows
RA 4200. Moreover, it is the act of listening to private
that the other will regard the conduct as insulting, or will
conversation of another through the extension telephone is
have his feelings hurt, is not enough
equivalent to eavesdropping through an electronic device.
Hence, it is not punishable under RA 4200 but a civil case
To recover for the intentional infliction of emotional distress
for damages under Art. 26 of NCC may prosper
the plaintiff must show that:
(a) The conduct of the defendant was intentional or
in reckless disregard of the plaintiff; Article 26 of the New Civil Code “ Every person shall
(b) The conduct was extreme and outrageous; respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind
(c) There was a causal connection between the of his neighbors and other persons. The following and
defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s mental similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal
distress; and, offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages,
(d) The plaintiff’s mental distress was extreme and prevention and other relief:
severe
“Extreme and outrageous conduct” means
(1) Prying into the privacy of another's residence:
conduct that is so outrageous in character,
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family
and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond
relations of another;
all possible bounds of decency, and to be
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his
regarded as atrocious, and utterly
friends;
intolerable in civilized society. The
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious
defendant’s actions must have been so
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect,
terrifying as naturally to humiliate,
or other personal condition.
embarrass or frighten the plaintiff.

45
 • It declares unlawful for ANY person, unless
authorized by the PROPER TELEPHONE COMPANY
Any person (whether a party of the conversation or not) who
(hence, authorization of all parties is not needed),
knowingly possess any:
to install or connect or cause or induce to be
 Tape record
installed or connected any telephone or line
 Wire record
whether connecting it by wire or cable or through
 Disc record. or
any other means, with already existing telephone
 Any other such record or copies of any
duly installed in private residence.
communications before or after the effective
date of this Act. (Sec. 1, paragraph 2)
Exception under PD 55
• Unless authorized by court in relation to Sec. 3 of
RA 4200
Q: Who are liable under this Act?
• Any person who records such communication not Other related law
being authorized by ALL parties of the converstion • Republic Act No. 5733, punishes registered
(Sec.1, par. 1) Electronics and Communication Engineer who shall
• Any person knowingly possess any recording of any engage in:
communication (Sec. 1, par. 2) – Illegal wire tapping
• Any person who willfully OR knowingly OR who shall – Employment of electronics device in
aid, permit or cause to record or to possess such violation of privacy of another
communication (Sec. 2)
Intrusion in Public Records
Every people has a right to information on matters of
Exception: Requisites PUBLIC CONCERN. They shall be granted access to:
-official records
• A police officer
-documents, and
-papers pertaining to:
• Authorized by a WRITTEN ORDER of the COURT,
*official acts,
– which is applied and examined under oath
*transactions, or
or affirmation of the applicant and to
*decisions and government research data used as
produce witness showing:
basis for policy development.
• reasonable ground for the
existence of the crimes
This right is subject to limitations provided by law. (Sec. 7
enumerated
Art. 3 of the Constitution)
• Reasonable grounds to believe that
evidence to be obtained may Case: Valmonte, Et. Al. Vs Belmonte, Jr. (170 Scra
sustain conviction, and 256)
• No other means readily available Facts:
for obtaining evidence  Valmonte wrote a letter to Belmonte, requesting
•
the list of names in the Batasang Pambansa (now
• Can record or obtain possession of any
Congress) belonging to UNIDO and PDP-Laban who
communication even not authorized by ALL the
were able to secure loans immediately before the
parties of the conversation
elections
 the loan were guaranteed by Imelda Marcos
• In cases involving:
 Deputy General Counsel Tiro of the GSIS refused
– Treason, espoinage, provoking war and
to furnish since it is a confidential relationship
disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in
between the borrower and GSIS
high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and
 Valmonte filed a petition for mandamus to the SC
proposal to commit rebellion, inciting to
to compel GSIS to furnish the requested names
rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit
 Belmonte, on behalf of GSIS, invoked that the
sedition, inciting to sedition, kidnapping,
information sought is private in nature
espoinage and other offenses against
national security (Sec. 3)
Issue: W/N the information requested is a matter of public
Admissibility of the recording concern.
• It is not admissible in evidence in any:
– Judicial Held: Yes. GSIS is a trustee of contributions from the
– Quasi-judicial government and its employees and the administrator of
– Legislative, or various insurance programs for the benefit of the latter.
– Administrative hearing or investigation. Undeniably its funds assume a public character. It is
therefore the legitimate concern of the public to ensure that
Presidential Decree No. 55 these funds are managed properly with the end in view of
maximizing the benefits that accrue to the insured
46
government employees. Moreover, GSIS failed to cite a law • Piracy or the unauthorized copying, reproduction,
that the information requested is not available for the public. dissemination, distribution, importation, use,
removal, alteration, substitution, modification
Take note: Matters of public concern is for the courts to storage, uploading, downloading, communication,
determine. making available to the public, or broadcasting of
protected material, electronic signature or
Factual problem copyrighted works including legally protected
Atty. A sent letters to the individual justices of the First works, through the use of telecommunication
Division of SC containing disparaging remarks concerning the networks, such as, but not limited to, the internet,
performance of their judicial functions. Due to the in a manner that infinges intellectual property
contumacious character of the said letter, the First Division rights,
referred the matter to the en banc. It was invoked that the
same is private in character and therefore covered by the • Violations of the Consumer Act or Republic Act No.
privacy of communication clause of the Constitution. Decide. 7394 and other relevant or pertinent laws through
transactions covered by or using electronic data
Answer messages or electronic documents, and
• Other violations of the provision (Sec. 33 of RA No.
The letters has became part of the judicial record and have 8792)
become a matter of concern for the entire Court (citing In Re:
Wenceslao Laureta, 148 Scra 382). Hence, no longer covered Republic Act No. 9995 or Anti-Photo and Video
by the Constitutional guarantee. Voyeurism Act of 2000
Source: Principles, Comments and Cases in Constitutional
Law Vol. 2 by Rolando Suarez 2016 ed.
Q: What is Photo or video voyuerism?
A: An act of taking photo or video coverage of a person or
Intrusion in the Internet
group of persons performing sexual act or any similar
When is there an intrusion in the internet?
activity or of capturing an image of the private area of a
-if a person is engaged in what is known as unlawful
person or persons without latter’s consent. This is includes:
access contemplated in RA No. 8792 or the Electronic
act of selling, copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing,
Commerce Act, specifically Sec. 31.
showing or exhibiting the photo or video coverage or
Sec. 31 of RA No. 8792
recording of such sexual act or similar activity through:
Q: What is Lawful Access? 1. VCD/DVD
2. Interent,
 Access to an electronic file or an electronic signature
3. Cellular phones, and
of an electronic data message or electronic
4. Similar means or device without WRITTEN consent
document shall only be authorized and enforced in
of the persons involved (Sec. 3 (d))
favor the individual or entity having a legal right to
the possession or the use of the plain text, electronic
Exemption (Sec. 6)
signature or file and solely for the authorized
Requisites:
pruposes. The electronic key for indentity or integrity
1. Any peace officer,
shall not be made available to any person or party
2. Who is authorized by a written order of the court
without the consent of the individual or entity in
-which is to be applied by applicant and examined under
lawful possession or the electronic key.
oath or affirmation and the witnesses, who the applicant
may produce, and there is showing that there are
Q: What if other person obtained access to electronic
reasonable grounds to believe that photo or video
key, data message or documents?
voyeurism has been committed or about to be committed
and would render a conviction
Sec. 32 provides he shall not convey or share the same with 1. To use the record or any copy thereof as evidence
any other person in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of the
crime of photo or video voyeurism
What are the acts penalized?
• Hacking or cracking Publication of Private Facts
– The unauthorized access into or interference  The interest sought to be protected is the right to
in a computer system/server or information be free from unwarranted publicity, from the
and communication system, or access in wrongful publicizing of the private affairs and
order to corrupt, alter, steal or destroy activities of an individual which are outside the
using a computer or other similar realm of legitimate public concern.
information and communication devices
without knowledge or consent of the owner.  Elements:
This includes, introduction of computer a) there is a public disclosure,
viruses. (Sec. 33 (a)) b) without the latter’s consent, and

47
c) regardless of whether or not such publicity constitutes
criminal offense like libel or defamation.
Alicia authored the article Malagim Na Wakas Ng Isang Pag-
ibig in the Aliwan Magazine. The article contains details of
 Aggravating circumstance: the publication was private and personal affairs of the plaintiffs and used their
made with intent of gain or for commercial and real names. RTC ruled infavor of the plaintiffs
business purposes.
Issue: W/N there was violation of privacy under Article 26.
Case: Ayer Production, et al vs Hon. Capulong et al Gr
Nos. 82380 and 82398 Held: Yes, particularly paragraphs 1 and 2.

Facts: Ayer Production wanted to create a motion picture The unwarranted publication of a person’s name, or the
depicting the 1986 EDSA Revolution with a title “The Four Day unauthorized use or publication of his photograph or other
Revolution” They sought the permission from Fidel Ramos and likeness, constitutes the most common means of invasion
Juan Ponce Enrile who were active participants during the of the right of privacy.
happening.
The love affairs between Joselito and the late Anida is
private and purely personal to the parties concerned over
Fidel V. Ramos signified his approval but Juan Ponce Enrile
which the public obviously can claim no legitimate interest
did not approve the exhibition of his name, his picture or any
whatsoever
member of his family

The right of privacy covers all intrusion whether or not

Ayer Production deleted the name of Enrile from the movie publicity constitutes a criminal offense like libel or
script and the former proceeded to film the projected motion defamation
picture.
Case: Vivares vs STC Gr. No. 202666
Enrile filed a complaint with application of TRO and writ of SC: A person who places a photograph on the internet
preliminary injuction with RTC which was granted. Ayer precisely intends to forsake and renounce all privacy rights
to such imagery, particularly under circumstances such as
production alleged freedom of expression while Enrile
here, where the defendant did not employ protective
interposed right of privacy
measures or devices that would have controlled access to
Issue: W/N the motion picture violated the right of privacy of the Wed page or the photograph itself (citing US vs Gines-
Enrile. Perez)

Held: No. Setting the posts to be viewed as “Friends” does not give
1. Because of the preferred character of the assurance that it can no longer be viewed by another user
constitutional right of freedom of speech and who is not Facebook friends with the source of the content
expression , it vitiates measure of prior restraint SC advised that “had it been the pictures posted were
upon the exercise of such freedoms. limited to the original uploader, through “Me only”, or the
2. The subject matter is one of public interest and must viewers are limited, through selecting “Custom”, the result
be regarded as having passed into the public domain may have been different. There is a manifestation of effort
and from the mass media. It is not about the private of keeping the photos private
life of the Enrile
3. A public figure has been defined as a person who, by OSN users should be aware of the risks that they expose
his accomplishments, fame, or mode of living, or by themselves to whenever they engage in cyberspace
adopting a profession or calling which gives the activities.Accordingly, they should be cautious enough to
public a legitimate interest in his doings, affairs, and control their privacy and to exercise sound discretion
his character, has become a public personage or a regarding how much information about themselves they are
celebrity willing to give up. Internet consumers ought to be aware
4. Such public figures were held to have lost, to some that, by entering or uploading any kind of data or
extent at least, their right of privacy, their affairs information online, they are automatically and inevitably
had already become public, and could no longer be making it permanently available online, the perpetuation of
regarded as their own private business which is outside the ambit of their control. Furthermore,
5. Enrile, for actively participating in the historical and more importantly, information, otherwise private,
event and being a member of the Senate, is a public voluntarily surrendered by them can be opened, read, or
figure. copied by third parties who may or may not be allowed
Jose Cordero et al vs Alicia Buigasco et al (17 CAR 2s access to such.
517 CA)
Hence, inorder to invoke privacy of uploaded photos in
Facts: A complaint instituted by Joselito Gomesz and spouses OSN, it is first necessary that said user manifest the
Jose Cordero and Eusebia Cordero for damages, invoking intention to keep certain posts private, through the
Article 26 of NCC, against Alicia Buigasco

48
employment of measures to prevent access thereto or to limit faith is liable shall be those that are the natural
its visibility by utilization of the OSN’s privacy tools and probable consequences of the breach of the
OSN’s privacy tools: obligation, and which the parties have foreseen or
a. Public could have reasonably foreseen at the time the
b. Friends of friends obligation was constituted.
c. Friends
d. Custom
 In case of fraud, bad faith, malice or wanton
e. Only me
attitude, the obligor shall be responsible for all
damages which may be reasonably attributed to
KINDS OF DAMAGES
the non-performance of the obligation.
Art. 2197. Damages may be:
1) Actual or compensatory;
2) Moral; Certainty of Damages
3) Nominal;  A party is entitled to adequate compensation only
4) Temperate or moderate; for such pecuniary loss actually suffered and duly
5) Liquidated; or prove.
6) Exemplary or corrective.  The claimant is duty-bound to point out specific
7) facts that afford a basis for measuring whatever
Actual or Compensatory Damages compensatory damages are borne.
Article 2199 of the Civil Code provides that “except  Proof of actual loss is not necessary in cases where
as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to an the law or jurisprudence allows the award of civil
adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered indemnity
by him as he has duly proved. Such compensation is referred
to as actual or compensatory damages.” Damage to Property
 Damage to or Loss of Personal Property
Purpose of the law in awarding actual damages is to Where goods were destroyed by the wrongful act
repair the wrong that has been done, to compensate for the of the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to their value at
injury inflicted, and not to impose a penalty. the time of destruction.

Classification of Actual Damages  Damage to or Loss of Real Property

In case of total loss, the value of the real property
1) Dano Emergente or the loss of what a person already at the time and place of the loss must be assessed and such
possesses. assessed value is the measure of the damage due to the
2) Lucro Cesante or the failure to receive as a benefit tha t plaintiff.
would have pertained to him. It shall also include loss or
impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or  Loss of Possession
permanent personal injury. Where the plaintiff was merely deprived of his
possession said plaintiff is entitled to the value of use of
Both items of damages may be awarded in the same the premises.
case in favor of the same injured party. Personal Injury

Extent and Measure of Damages If the plaintiff is asking for damages for his own
injury, said plaintiff is entitled to the amount of medical
Art. 2202. In crimes and quasi- delicts, the defendant shall be expenses as well as other reasonable expenses that he
liable for all damages which are the natural and probable incurred to treat his or his relative’s injuries.
consequences of. It is not necessary that such damages have
been foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the Damages in Case of Death
defendant.  When death occurs due to a negligent act or a
crime, the following damages may be recovered:
General Rule: The damage is measured on plaintiff’s loss 1) civil indemnity ex delicto for the death of the
and not on defendant’s gain. victim;
2) actual or compensatory damages;
Exception: Damages are measured by the benefit that has 3) moral damages;
accrued to the defendant in certain cases. 4) exemplary damages;
5) attoney’s fees and expenses of litigation; and
Example: In Intellectual Property Code allows recovery of the 6) interest, in proper cases.
amount that was earned by the defendant who infringed the
right of the owner of the mark. Loss of Earning Capacity
 Formula for the computation of the awarded
Damages in Breach of Contract damages for loss of earning capacity
 Art. 2201. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the Net Earning Capacity = Life Expectancy x [Gross
damages for which the obligor who acted in good Annual less Necessary Living Expenses]

49
Loss of Profits Elements
 This may take in the form of commissions that were 1) There must be an injury, whether physical, mental
lost by reason of the acts or omissions of the or psychological, clearly sustained by the claimant;
defendant. This may also take the form of income 2) There must be a culpable act or omission factually
that was stipulated in the contract that was established;
terminated in a wanton and fraudulent manner. 3) The wrongful act or omission of the defendant is
 Damages may include the cost of lost opportunity the proximate cause of the injury sustained by the
consisting of the profits that the plaintiff failed to claimant; and
obtain due to a contract’s early termination. 4) The award of damages is predicted on any of the
 cases stated in Art. 2219.
Attorney’s Fees
Proof and Causation
 The assessment of the damage is left to the
GR: In the absence of stipulation, attorney’s fees and
discretion of the court, according to the
expenses of litigation, other than judicial costs, cannot be
circumstances of each case.
recovered.

Cases When Moral Damages May Be Awarded

Except: 1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries;
1) When exemplary damages are awarded; 2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries;
2) When the defendant’s act or omission has compelled 3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious
the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur acts;
expenses to protect his interest; 4) Adultery or concubinage;
3) In criminal cases of malicious prosecution against the 5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest;
plaintiff; 6) Illegal search;
4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or 7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation;
proceeding against the plaintiff; 8) 8) Malicious prosecution;
5) Where the defendant acted in gross and evident bad 9) 9) Acts mentioned in Article 309;
faith in refusing to satisfy the plaintiff’s plainly valid, 10) 10) Acts and actions referred to in Arts. 21, 26,
just and demandable claim; 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34 and 35.
6) In actions for legal support; 11) The parents of the female seduced, abducted,
7) In actions for the recovery of wages of household, raped or abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article,
helpers, laborers and skilled workers; may also recover moral damages.
8) In actions for indemnity under workmen’s 12) The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and
compensation and employer’s liability laws; brothers and sisters may bring the action
9) In a separate civil action to recover civil liability mentioned in No.9 of this article, in the order
arising from a crime; named.
10) When at least double judicial cost are awarded; 13)
11) In any other cases where the court deems it just and Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground
equitable that attorney’s fees and expenses of for awarding moral damages if the court should find that,
litigation should be recovered. under the circumstances, such damages are justly due. The
12) In all cases, the attorney’s fees and expenses of same rule applies to breaches of contract where the
litigation must be reasonable. defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.

Interest- may be paid only either as a compensation for the Factors in Determining Amount
use of money (monetary interest) or as damages  Factors specified by law and established by
(compensatory interest). jurisprudence that could affect the amount
recovered.
Monetary interest refers to the price paid for the use of 1) Extent of Humiliation
money for a period of time and are expressed as a 2) Pain and suffering
percentage of the total outstanding balance that is either 3) Official, Political, Social and Financial Standing
fixed or variable. 4) Age
5)
2) Moral Damages Fixed Amount
Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish,  In murder cases, fixed amount of moral damages
fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded is P500,000.
feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injury.  In case of moral damages for separate civil actions
for quasi-delict where the victim died is P500,000.
Effect of Death  In case of moral damages for each conviction of
 A claim for moral damages does not survive the rape which is qualified by circumstances
death of the plaintiff. warranting the imposition of the death penalty
Reason: It is extremely personal to the injured party.

50
 (even if the same penalty is no longer imposable) is
P100,000. Cannot Co-Exist with Actual Damages
Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of
Persons who may Recover the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the
 Generally, the person who endured physical defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the
suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered
besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral by him. An award of compensatory damages is a vindication
shock, social humiliation and similar injury is the of right. It is in itself recognition that plaintiff’s right was
person who can recover moral damages. violated, hence, the award of nominal damages is
 If the basis of the claim is suffering, only the one unnecessary and improper.
who suffered and not his or her spouse may recover.
 a) Relatives Labor Cases
Nominal damages may be appropriately awarded if the right
Exceptions: to procedural due process of the employee was violated.
 The parents of the female seduced, This award is proper where there is just or authorized cause
abducted, raped or abused, referred to in No. 3 of but due process was not accorded to the employee.
this article, may also recover moral damages.
 The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and 4)Temperate or Moderate Damages
brothers and sisters may bring the action mentioned  Art. 2224. Temperate or moderate damages, which
in No.9 of this article, in the order named. are more than nominal but less than compensatory
 The acts mentioned in No. 9 those covered damages, may be recovered when the court finds
by Art. 309 of the NCC provides that “any person that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its
wh0 shows disrespect to the dead, or wrongfully amount can not, from the nature of the case, be
interferes with a funeral shall be liable to the family provided with certainty.
of the deceased for damages, material and moral.”
 Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be
In addition, Art. 2209 provides that the spouse, legitimate reasonable under the circumstances.
and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased
may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of Loss of Earning Capacity
the death of the deceased.  Temperate damages may be awarded in lieu of
actual damages for loss of earning capacity where
b) Corporation the earning capacity is plainly established but no
GR: Corporations and other artificial beings are not entitled to evidence was presented to support the allegation
recover damages. of the injured party.

Exception: The only exception to the rule is when the Lost Earnings
corporation has a reputation that is debased, resulting in its  Temperate damages can be awarded when the
humiliation in the business realm. court finds that some pecuniary loss has been
suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of
3) Nominal Damages the case, be proved with certainty.
Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a
right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by Fixed Temperate Damages
the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for  In murder cases, the Supreme court pegged the
the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered amount of temperate damages at P25,000 if actual
by him. damages were not established.
 In cases where the amount of actual damages for
It is generally held that a nominal damages is a substantial funeral expenses cannot be determined because of
claim, if based upon the violation of a legal right; in such the absence of receipts to prove them, temperate
case, the law presumes damage although actual or damages may be awarded in the amount of
compensatory damages are not proven. P25,000.

Generally, nominal damages by their nature are small sums Injury to Business or Credit Standing
fixed by the court without regard to the extent of the harm  The Court in one case ruled that “in an action by a
done to the injured party. depositor against a bank for damages resulting
from the wrongful dishonor of the depositor’s
In the case of A. T. Stearns Lumber Co. vs Howlett the court check, temperate damages for injury to business
ruled that “only nominal damages can be recovered by a standing or commercial credit may be recovered
manufacturer that was injured by a conspiracy to prevent use even in the absence of definite proof of direct
of his product, where the actual damages cannot be pecuniary loss to the plaintiff, under Article 2205
determined and others also suffered whatever he suffered in of the New Civil Code.”
the same line of business so that he suffered no special
damages whatsoever.” LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

51
 • are frequently agreed upon by the parties, either by
way of penalty or in order to avoid controversy on Issue: Whether or not Atlantic is liable for liquidated
the amount of damages. damages.
• If intended as a penalty in obligations with a penal
cause, proof of actual damages suffered by the Held: Yes. The CIAC disallowed liquidated damages
creditor is not necessary in order that the penalty because Herbal Cove failed to comply with the rule on
may be demanded (Art. 1228, NCC). No proof of notice. However, the contract is the law between the parties
pecuniary loss is necessary. and there are provisions in the same contract which provide
"the Contractor shall be required to pay the Owner the
Case: Atlantic Erectors, Inc. v. Court of Appeals liquidated damages in the amount stipulated in the Contract
[G.R. No. 170732, October 11, 2012, 684 SCRA 55] Agreement, the said payment to be made as liquidated
damages, and not by way of penalty. The Owner may
DOCTRINE: deduct from any sum due or to become due the Contractor
Liquidated damages – The parties to a contract are allowed to any sums accruing for liquidated damages as herein
stipulate on liquidated damages to be paid in case of breach. stated." also, "Neither the taking over by the Owner of the
It is attached to an obligation in order to ensure performance work for completion by administration nor the re-letting of
and has a double function: (1) to provide for liquidated the same to another Contractor shall be construed as a
damages, and (2) to strengthen the coercive force of the waiver of the Owner’s rights to recover damages against
obligation by the threat of greater responsibility in the event the original Contractor and/or his sureties for the failure to
of breach. As a pre-condition to such award, however, there complete the work as stipulated." Thus, under the contract,
must be proof of the fact of delay in the performance of the Herbal Cove's right to liquidated damages is distinct from
obligation. the right to terminate contract.

Effect of default – As long as the contractor fails to finish the EXEMPLARY/CORRECTIVE DAMAGES
works within the period agreed upon by the parties without • are intended to serve as a deterrent to serious
justifiable reason and after the owner makes a demand, then wrongdoings.
liability for damages as a consequence of such default arises. • That the claimant is entitled to moral, temperate
or compensatory damages; and that the crime was
Facts: Respondent Herbal Cove Realty Corporation (Herbal committed with 1 or more aggravating
Cove) wanted to build a a subdivision project somewhere in circumstances, or the quasi-‐ delict was
Tagaytay City. It hired petitioner Atlantic Erectors Inc. committed with gross negligence, or in contracts
(Atlantic) to build the project. The Construction Contract and quasi-contracts the act must be accompanied
indicated a contract price of almost P16.7Million and to finish by bad faith or done in wanton, fraudulent,
building within 180 days. To secure payment in case of non oppressive or malevolent manner. No proof of
completion of the project, the contract also provides: pecuniary loss is necessary.
•
ARTICLE IX FAILURE TO COMPLETE WORK Case: B.F. Metal Corporation vs Lomotan
GR No. 170813, 16 April 2008

Section 1: The CONTRACTOR acknowledges that the OWNER Facts:Rico Umuyon was driving the owner-type jeep owned
shall not suffer [loss] by the delay or failure of the by spouses Rolando and Linaflor Lomotan at a moderate
CONTRACTOR to finish and complete the works called for speed of 20 to 30 kilometers per hour when at the opposite
under this Contract within the time stipulated in Section 6, lane, the speeding ten-wheeler truck driven by Onofre
Article IV. The CONTRACTOR hereby expresses covenants and Rivera overtook a car by invading the lane being traversed
agrees to pay to the Owner liquidated damages equivalent to by the jeep and rammed into it. The jeep was a total wreck
the One-Tenth of One Percent (1/10 of 1%) of the Contract while Umuyon suffered ‘blunt thoracic injury with multiple
Price per calendar day of delay until completion, delivery and rib fracture, fractured scapula (L), with
acceptance of the said Works by the OWNER to a maximum pneumohemothorax", which entailed his hospitalization for
amount not to exceed 10%. 19 days . Also in view of the injuries he sustained, Umuyon
could no longer drive, reducing his daily income from P150
Atlantic was asked to commence construction on July 8, to P100.
1996, but eventually, it asked for an extension citing bad
weather and delayed turnover of project sites which Herbal
Cove granted but ultimately, Atlantic failed to deliver. Herbal The spouses Lomotan and Umuyon instituted a separate
Cove terminated the contract on October 3, 1997 and and independent civil action for damages against BF Metal
demanded liquidated damages. Herbal Cove also hired Corporation (“BF Metal”) and Rivera alleging that Rivera’s
another contractor to finish the job. It filed a case with the gross negligence and recklessness were the immediate and
Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC). The proximate cause of the vehicular accident and that BF Metal
CIAC found in favor of Herbal Cove but did not award failed to exercise the required diligence in the selection and
liquidated damages for failure to comply with 15-day notice of supervision of Rivera. The complaint prayed for the award
termination (provided for in its contract.). The CA awarded of actual, exemplary and moral damages and attorney’s
liquidated damages.

52
fees. Both the trial and appellate courts awarded P100,000 in
moral damages.

Issue: Whether the award of exemplary damages and

attorneys is warranted?

Ruling: Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed by

way of example or correction for the public good. It cannot be
recovered as a matter of right. The court will decide whether
or not it should be adjudicated. In quasi-delicts, exemplary
damages may be granted if defendant acted with gross
negligence. The amount of exemplary damages need not be
proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral,
temperate or compensatory damages before the court may
consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages
should be awarded. To serve as an example for the public
good, the Court affirms the award of exemplary damages
amounting to P100,000.00 and attorney’s fees of P25,000.00

Definition and Concept of Damages:

Damage has been defined by Esriche “as the detriment injury,
or loss which are occasioned by reason of fault of another in
the property or person.” Of whatsoever nature the damage
be, and from whatsoever cause it may proceed, the person
who has done the injury ought to repair it by an indemnity
proportionate to his fault to the loss caused thereby.
• The Supreme Court defined the word “damages” in
one case as the pecuniary compensation,
recompense, or satisfaction for an injury sustained,
or as otherwise expressed, the pecuniary
consequences which the law imposes for the breach
of some duty or violation of some rights.
• In another case, damage is defined as the loss, hurt
or harm which results from injury, and damages are
the recompense or compensation awarded for the
damage suffered.
Complaint for Damages is Personal Action
• A complaint for damages is a personal action and
may be commenced and tried where the defendant
or any of the defendant resides or may be found, or
where the plaintiff or any of the plaintiffs resides at
the election of the plaintiff
Award must be Monetary
• In action for damages, courts should award an
amount to the winning party and not its equivalent in
property.
• The damage that should be awarded should be the
money value of such damages.
• In one case, the plaintiffs were ordered “jointly and
solidarily liable to defendants the quantity of one
hundred (100) cavans of palay every year from
1972.”The Supreme Court deleted such award
explaining that One Hundred (100) cavans of palay
as a form of damages cannot be sustained because
palay is not legal currency of the Philippines.

53