Torts

San Beda College of Law
215
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
TORTS AND DAMAGES

I. TORTS TORT An unlawful violation of private right, not created by contract, and which gives rise to an action for damages. It is an act or omission producing an injury to another, without any previous existing lawful relation of which the said act or omission may be said to be a natural outgrowth or incident. NOTES: An unborn child is NOT entitled to damages. ut the bereaved parents may be entitled to damages, on damages inflicted directly upon them. !Geluz vs. CA, 2 SCRA 802" #efendants in tort cases can either be natural or artificial being. $orporations are civilly liable in the same manner as natural persons. Any person who has been injured by reason of a tortious conduct can sue the tortfeasor. The primary purpose of a tort action is to provide compensation to a person who was injured by the tortious conduct of the defendant. %reventive remedy is available in some cases. Classes of Torts: Cul a Contractual A. Negligent Torts . Intentional Torts $. &trict 'iability
The foundation of the liability of the defendant is the contract In breach of contract committed through the negligence of employee, the employer cannot erase his primary and direct liability by invo3ing exercise of diligence of a good father of a family in
NEGLIGENCE The omission of that degree of diligence which is re(uired by the nature of the obligation and corresponding to the circumstances of persons, time and place. !Article 1173 Civil Code" Kinds of Negligence: 1. Culpa Contractual !contractual negligence" )overned by $$ provisions on Obligations and $ontracts, particularly Arts. **+, to **+- of the $ivil $ode. 2. Culpa Aquiliana !quasi-delict" )overned mainly by Art. .*+/ of the $ivil $ode 3. Culpa Criminal !cri inal negligence" )overned by Art. 0/1 of the 2evised %enal $ode. NOTES:
The 0 3inds of negligence furnish

separate, distinct, and independent bases of liability or causes of action. A single act or omission may give rise to two or more causes of action.
Cul a A!uiliana
It is a separate source of obligation independent of contract In (uasi4delict the presumptive responsibility for the negligence of his servants can be rebutted by proof of the exercise of due care in their selection and supervision.
A. NEGLIGENT TORTS Involve voluntary acts or omissions which result in injury to others without intending to cause the same or because the actor fails to exercise due care in performing such acts or omissions. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnai a Ha!!iman, Doro"#y $ayon S%BJECT HEADS: C#ri!"o&#er Rey 'ara!i(an )Per!on! and *amily Rela"ion!+, Ale,andro Ca!a-ar)Pro&er"y+, 'a. R#odora *errer).ill! and Succe!!ion+, Ian Dominic Pua)O-li(a"ion! and Con"rac"!+, S#a Eli,a# Dumama)Sale! and /ea!e+, Jo#n S"e&#en 0uiam-ao)PAT+, C#ri!"o&#er Ca-i(ao)Credi" Tran!ac"ion!+, /i(aya Ali&ao)Tor"! and Dama(e!+, An"#ony Pur(anan)/TD+, 'a. Rica!ion Tu(adi )Con1lic"! o1 /a2+

216
MEMORY AID
IN
CIVIL LAW
the selection supervision of employee.
and the
If not then he is guilty of negligence. .. $ould a prudent man, in the case under consideration, foresee harm as a result of the course pursued7 If so, it was the duty of the actor to ta3e precautions to guard against harm. NOTES: Negligence is a conduct 4 the determination of the existence of negligence is concerned with what the defendant did or did not do The state of mind of the actor is not important6 good faith or use of sound judgment is immaterial. The existence of negligence in a given case is not determined by reference to the personal judgment but by the behavior of the actor in the situation before him. !!icart vs. S it"# Negligence is a conduct that creates an undue ris3 of harm to others. The determination of negligence is a (uestion of foresight on the part of the actor 8 9O2:&:A I'IT;. :ven if a particular injury was not foreseeable, the ris3 is still foreseeable if possibility of injury is foreseeable. 9orseeability involves the (uestion of %2O A I'IT;, that is, the existence of some real li3elihood of some damage and the li3elihood is of such appreciable weight reasonably to induce, action to avoid it.
Cul a A!uiliana
Only involves private concern The $ivil $ode by means of indem4 nification merely repairs the damage Includes all acts in which any 3ind of fault or negligence intervenes
Cri"e
Affect the interest public
The 2evised %enal $ode punishes or corrects criminal act
%unished only if there is a penal law clearly covering them
'iability is direct and primary in (uasi4 delict
'iability of the employer of the actor4employee is subsidiary in crimes
#$ASI%DELICT 5hoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence is obliged to pay for the damage done. !Article .*+/ $ivil $ode"
Essential Re!uisites for a !uasi% delictual action: *. Act or omission constituting fault or negligence6 .. #amage caused by the said act or omission6 and 0. $ausal relation between the damage and the act or omission. Tests of Negligence *. #id the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use the reasonable care and caution which an ordinarily prudent person would have used in the same situation7 CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Calculation of Ris& Interests are to be balanced only in the sense that the purposes of the actor, the nature of his act and the harm that may result from action or inaction are elements to be considered. Circu"stances to consider in deter"ining negligence: '(EST%GA() *. Time .. %lace 0. :mergency E"ergenc* rule

217
MEMORY AID
G$%$RA& R'&$( An individual who suddenly finds himself in a situation of danger and is re(uired to act without much time to consider the best means that may be adopted to avoid the impending danger is not guilty of negligence if he fails to underta3e what subse(uently and upon reflection may appear to be a better solution. $)C$!*+,%( 5hen the emergency was brought by the individual<s own negligence. !-alenzuela vs. CA 2.3 SCRA 303". )ravity of =arm to be avoided Alternative $ourse of Action If the alternative presented to the actor is too costly, the harm that may result may be still be considered unforeseeable to a reasonable man. &ocial value or utility of activity %erson exposed to the ris3
IN
CIVIL LAW
The law fixes no arbitrary age at

which a minor can be said to have the necessary capacity to understand and appreciate the nature and conse(uence of his acts. !*a2lor vs. 3eralco, 14 !"il 8" Applying the provisions of the 2evised %enal $ode, >udge &angco ta3es the view that a child who is ? or below is conclusively presumed to be incapable of negligence. In the other hand, if the child is above ? years but below *1, there is a disputable presumption of absence of negligence. Absence of negligence does not necessarily mean absence of liability. 'iability without fault@ a child under ? years can still be subsidiarily liable with his property !Art. *,,, 2%$" Absence of negligence of the child may not excuse the parents from their vicarious liability under Art. .*A, N$$ or Art. ..* 9$. 0. (/*sical Disa1ilit* Bere wea3ness of a person will not be an excuse in negligence cases. =owever if defect amounts to a real disability the standard of conduct is that of a reasonable person under li3e disability. 2. E3 erts and rofessionals They should exhibit the care and s3ill of one who is ordinarily s3illed in the particular field that he is in. 5hen a person holds himself out as being competent to do things re(uiring professional s3ill, he will be held liable for negligence if he fails to exhibit the care and s3ill of one ordinarily s3illed in the particular wor3 which he attempts to do. An expert will not be judged based on what a non4expert can foresee. The rule regarding experts is applicable not only to professionals who have undergone formal education. 4. Nature of acti5it* There are activities which by nature impose duties to exercise a higher degree of diligence.
-. 1.
/. +.
GOOD +AT,ER O+ A +AMIL- ' pater familias): 4 this is the standard of conduct used in the %hilippines 4 a man of ordinary intelligence and prudence or an ordinary reasonable prudent man a reasonable man deemed to have 3nowledge of the facts that a man should be expected to 3now based on ordinary human experience. /!%R vs +AC, 217 SCRA 001# 4 a prudent man who is expected to 3now the basic laws of nature and physics, e.g. gravity. SPECIAL RULES .. C/ildren The action of the child will not necessarily be judged according to the standard of an adult. ut if the minor is mature enough to understand and appreciate the nature and conse(uence of his actions, he will be considered negligent if he fails to exercise due care and precaution in the commission of such acts. NOTES: CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

21
MEMORY AID
$5a 6les( a. 7an8s, by the very nature of their wor3, are expected to exercise the highest degree of diligence in the selection and supervision of their employees. b. Co on carriers are re(uired to exercise extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over their passengers and transported goods. !Article 1733 Civil Code". 6. Into3ication G$%$RA& R'&$( Bere intoxication is not negligence, nor does the mere fact of intoxication establish want of ordinary care. ut it may be one of the circumstances to be considered to prove negligence. $)C$!*+,%( Cnder Art. 218. o9 t"e Civil Code, it is presumed that a person driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation. 7. Insanit* The insanity of a person does not excuse him or his guardian from liability based on (uasi4delict. 7ases 9or "olding an insane 6erson lia:le 9or "is tort( a. 5here one of two innocent persons must suffer a loss, it should be borne by the one who occasioned it. b. To induce those interested in the estate of the insane person to restrain and control him. c. The fear that an insanity would lead to false claims of insanity and avoid liability. 8. 9o"en In determining the (uestion of contributory negligence in performing such act, the age, sex, and condition of the passengers are circumstances necessarily affecting the safety of the passenger, and should be considered. !Cangco vs. 3anila Railroad Co. GR %o.12111, ,cto:er 10, 1118" Although there is no une(uivocal statement of the rule, -alenzuela vs. CA 2.3SCRA303 appears to re(uire a different standard of care for women CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
under the circumstances indicated therein. =owever, #ean )uido $alabresi believes that there should be a uniform standard between a men and a women. Ot/er +actors to Consider in Deter"ining Negligence: A. :IOLATION O+ R$LES AND STAT$TES *. &tatutes G$%$RA& R'&$( Diolation of a statutory duty is N:)'I):N$: %:2 &: !Ci6riano vs. CA, 243SCRA711". 5hen the 'egislature has spo3en, the standard of care re(uired is no longer what a reasonably prudent man would do under the circumstances but what the 'egislature has commanded. $)C$!*+,%S( a. 5hen unusual conditions occur and strict observance may defeat the purpose of the rule and may even lead to adverse results. b. 5hen the statute expressly provides that violation of a statutory duty merely establishes a presumption of negligence. NOTE: Rule as to 6roo9 o9 6ro5i ate cause G$%$RA& R'&$( %laintiff must show that the violation of the statute is the proximate or legal cause of the injury or that it substantially contributed thereto. !Sanitar2 Stea &aundr2, +nc. vs. CA 300SCRA20" $)C$!*+,%( In cases where the damage to the plaintiff is the damage sought to be prevented by the statute. In such cases, proof of violation of statute and damage to the plaintiff may itself establish proximate cause. !*eague vs. ;ernandez .1SCRA181". .. Administrative 2ule Diolation of a rule promulgated by administrative agencies is not negligence per se but may be :DI#:N$: O9 N:)'I):N$:. 0. %rivate 2ules of $onduct. Diolation of rules imposed by private individuals !e.g. employers" is

21!
MEMORY AID
merely a %O&&I ': N:)'I):N$:. :DI#:N$: O9 B. 2es Ipsa 'o(uitur
IN
CIVIL LAW
;. (RACTICE AND C$STOM $ompliance with the practice and custom in a community will not automatically result in a finding that the actor is not guilty of negligence. Non4 compliance with the practice or custom in the community does not necessarily mean that the actor was negligent. In <a ada vs. 3anila Railroad Co., the owner of an automobile struc3 by a train while crossing the trac3s sought to establish absence of negligence of its driver by evidence of a custom of automobile drivers of Banila by which they habitually drove their cars over the railroad crossings without slac3ening speed. The &$ rejected the argument by ruling that@ a practice which is dangerous to human life cannot ripen into custom which will protect anyone who follows it. C. COM(LIANCE 9IT, STAT$TES $ompliance with a statute is not conclusive that there was no negligence. $5a 6le( A defendant can still be held liable for negligence even if he can establish that he was driving below the speed limit. $ompliance with the speed limit is not conclusive that he was not negligently driving his car. Gross Negligence 4 Negligence where there is Ewant of even slight care and diligence.F (ROO+ O+ NEGLIGENCE G$%$RA& R'&$@ If the plaintiff alleged in his complaint that he was damaged because of the negligent acts of the defendant, the plaintiff has the bur en of pro!in" such ne"li"ence. !*a2lor vs. 3$RA&C, 14!"il8" The (uantum of proof re(uired is 6re6onderance o9 evidence. !Rule 133 Revised Rules o9 Court" $)C$!*+,%S( :xceptional cases when the rules or the law provides for cases when negligence is presumed. A. %resumptions of Negligence CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
A. (resu" tions of Negligence *. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is presumed negligent if he was in the vehicle and he could have used due diligence to prevent the misfortune. !Article 2180 Civil Code" .. It is disputably presumed that a driver was negligent if he had been found guilty of rec3less driving or violating traffic regulations at least twice for the next preceding two months. !Article 2180 Civil Code" 0. The driver of a motor vehicle is presumed negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation. !Article 218. Civil Code" 4. G$%$RA& R'&$( %rima facie presumption of negligence of the defendant arises if death or injury results from his possession of dangerous weapons or substance. $)C$!*+,%( 5hen such possession or use is indispensable to his occupation or business. !Article 2188 Civil Code" 5. G$%$RA& R'&$( %resumption of negligence of the common carrier arises in case of loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods, or in case of death or injury of passengers. $)C$!*+,%( Cpon proof of exercise of extraordinary diligence. ;. Res I sa Lo!uitur E*"e t"ing or transaction s6ea8s 9or itsel9.F It is a rule of evidence peculiar to the law of negligence which recogniGes that prima facie negligence may be established in the absence of direct proof, and furnishes a substitute for specific proof of negligence.
Re!uisites of Res I sa Lo!uitor: *. The accident was of a 3ind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone<s negligence6

22"
MEMORY AID
.. The instrumentality which caused the injury was under the exclusive control and management of the person charged with negligence6 and 0. The injury suffered must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the person injured6 absence of explanation by the defendant.
IN
CIVIL LAW
In A9rica vs. Calte5 /!"il.# +nc. 3ar 31, 1144, defendant $altex was liable for damage done to the property of its neighbors when fire bro3e out in a $altex service station. The gasoline station, with all its appliances, e(uipment and employees, was under the control of the defendant. The persons who 3new how the fire started were the defendant and its employees, but they gave no explanation whatsoever. The doctrine is not applicable if there is direct proof of absence or presence of negligence. !S.=. 3artinez, et al vs. >illia -an 7us8ir8"
. #uty to rescue G$%$RA& R'&$( There is no general duty to rescue6 a person is not liable for (uasi4delict even if he did not help a person in distress. $)C$!*+,%S( A limited duty to rescue is imposed in certain cases@ Abandonment of persons in danger and abandonment of one<s own victim is considered, under certain circumstances as a crime against security !Article 27. R!C"6 and No driver of a motor vehicle concerned in a vehicular accident shall leave the scene of the accident without aiding the victim unless he is excused from doing so. /Section .. RA 0134 ?&and *rans6ortation and tra99ic Code@# 0. O<ners= (ro rietors and (ossessors of (ro ert* G$%$RA& R'&$( The owner has no duty to ta3e reasonable care towards a trespasser for his protection or even to protect him from concealed danger. NOTE: #amage to any person resulting from the exercise of any rights of ownership is damage without injury /=a nu a:sque inAuria#
A++IRMATI:E D$TIES AND MISCELLANEO$S ACTI:ITIES: .. Dut* to Rescue A. #uty to the rescuer The defendants are liable for the injuries to persons who rescue people in distress because of the acts or omissions of the said defendants. There is liability to the rescuer and the law does not discriminate between the rescuer oblivious to the peril and the one who counts the costs. The ris3 of rescue, if only not wanton, is born of the occasion. One who was hurt trying to rescue another who was injured through negligence may recover damages. !Santiago vs. =e leon CA-GR %o.14180-R 3arc" 21, 1140" #anger of personal injury or death.
$)C$!*+,%S( a. Disitors and tolerated possession The owner is still liable if the plaintiff is inside his property by tolerance or by implied permission. Owners of buildings or premises owe duty of care to visitors. b. #octrine of Attractive Nuisance One who maintains on his premises dangerous instrumentalities or appliances of a character li3ely to attract children in play, and who fails to exercise ordinary care to prevent children from playing therewith or resorting thereto, is liable to a child of tender years who is injured thereby, even if the child is technically a trespasser in the premises. NOTE: A swimming pool or pond or reservoir of water is NOT considered attractive nuisance. !Bidalgo $nter6rises vs. 7aladan 11 !"il 088"
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE


221
MEMORY AID
c. &tate of Necessity The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the interference of another with the same if the interference is necessary to avert imminent danger and the threatened damage, compared to the damage arising to the owner from the interference, is much greater. !Article 032 Civil Code" It is also a recogniGed justifying circumstance under the 2%$. In both the $ivil $ode and the 2%$, the owner may demand from the person benefited, indemnity for the damages. $se of ro erties t/at in>ures anot/er An owner cannot use his property in such a manner as to injure the rights of others. !Article 031 Civil Code". =ence the exercise of the right of the owner may give rise to an action based on (uasi4delict if the owner negligently exercises such right to the prejudice of another. &ia:ilit2 o9 !ro6rietors o9 :uildings New $ivil $ode include provisions that apply to proprietors of a building or structure which involve affirmative duty of due care in maintaining the same@ Articles .*?, and .*?*. Third persons who suffered damages may proceed only against the engineer or architect or contractor if the damage referred to in Articles .*?, and .*?*should be a result of any defect in construction. Nevertheless, actions for damages can still be maintained under Article .*+/ for damages resulting from proprietor<s failure to exercise due care in the maintenance of his building and that he used his property in such a way that he injured the property of another. 2. E" lo*ers and E" lo*ees A. E" lo*ers Actions for (uasi4delict can still be maintained even if employee<s compensation is provided for under the 'abor $ode. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
In (uasi4delictual actions against the employer, the employee may use the provisions of the 'abor $ode which imposes upon the employer certain duties with respect to the proper maintenance of the wor3 place or the provisions of ade(uate facilities to ensure the safety of the employees. Articles *+** and *+*. of the $ivil $ode impose liability without fault on the part of the employers.
;. E" lo*ees :mployees are bound to exercise due care in the performance of their functions for the employers6 absence such due care, the employee may be held liable. 4. ;an&s The business of ban3s is one affected by public interest. ecause of the nature of its functions, a ban3 is under obligation to treat the accounts of its depositors with "eticulous care, always having in mind the fiduciary nature of their relationship. !!7C vs. CA ?1117@" 6. Co""on carriers 9rom the nature of their business and for reasons of public policy, they are bound to exercise extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and the safety of the passengers. The case against the common carrier is for the enforcement of an obligation arising from breach of contract. The same act which breached the contract may give rise to an action based on (uasi delict. /Air ;rance vs Carrascoso, &21038, Se6t. 28, 1114# 7. Doctors A. &TAN#A2# O9 $A2: The proper standard is whether, the physician if a general 6ractitioner, has exercised the degree of care and s3ill of the average (ualified practitioner, ta3ing into account the advances in the profession. A physician who holds himself out as a s6ecialist should be held to the standard of care and s3ill of the average

222
MEMORY AID
member of the profession practicing the specialty, ta3ing into account the advances in the profession. . T=: $A%TAIN O9 T=: &=I% #O$T2IN: The head surgeon is made liable for everything that goes wrong within the four corners of the operating room. It enunciates the liability of the surgeon not only for the wrongful acts of those under his physical control but also those wherein he has extension of control. $. NOT 5A22ANTO2& %hysicians are not warrantors of cures or insurers against personal injuries or death of the patient. #. %2OO9 $56ert testi on2 should be offered to prove that the circumstances are constitutive of conduct falling below the standard of care employed by other physicians in good standing when performing the same operation. Bedical malpractice can also be established by relying on the doctrine of res i6sa loquitor6 in which case the need of expert testimony is dispensed with because the injury itself provides the proof of negligence. !Ra os vs. CA, GR %o.1203.0, =ece :er 21, 1111" :xample@ The doctrine was applied in a case of removal of the wrong part of the body when another part was intended. #$o pron"e e!i ence% a. :vidence as to the recogniGed standards of the medical community in the particular 3ind of case6 and b. A showing that the physician departed from this standard in his treatment. &our elements in me ical ne"li"ence cases: duty, breach, injury and proximate causation :. 'IA I'IT; O9 =O&%ITA'& AN# $ON&C'TANT& There is no employer4employee relationship between the hospital and a physician admitted in the said hospital<s medical staff as an active or visiting CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
consultant which would hold the hospital liable solidarily liable for the injury suffered by a patient under Article .*A, of the $ivil $ode. !Ra os vs. CA GR %o 1203.0, A6ril 11, 2002" The contract between the consultant an the patient is separate and distinct the contract between the hospital an the patient. The 9irst has for its object the rendition of medical services by the consultant to the patient, while the second concerns the provision by the hospital of facilities and services by its staff such as nurses and laboratory personnel necessary for the proper treatment of the patient. ! Ra os vs. CA GR %o 1203.0, A6ril 11, 2002" 8. La<*ers An attorney is not bound to exercise extraordinary diligence but only a reasonable degree of care and s3ill, having reference to the business he underta3es to do. DE+ENSES IN NEGLIGENCE CASES Kinds of defenses: A. $omplete 8 completely recovery . %artial 8 mitigates liability
bars
.. (LAINTI++S COND$CT AND CONTRI;$TOR- NEGLIGENCE a. Plaintiffs o$n ne"li"ence as the pro'imate cause 5hen the plaintiffs own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover damages. !Article 2171 Civil Code" b. Contributor( ne"li"ence $onduct on the part of the injured party contributing as a legal cause to the harm he has suffered which falls below the standard to which he is re(uired to conform for his own protection. !-alenzuela vs. CA 2.3SCRA303" If the plaintiffs negligence was only contributory, the immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the defendant<s lac3 of due care, the plaintiff may recover damages but the courts shall

22#
MEMORY AID
mitigate the damages to be awarded !Article 2171 Civil Code". Doctrine of Co" arati5e Negligence The relative degree of negligence of the parties is considered in determining whether and to what degree, either should be responsible for his negligence !a66ortion ent o9 da ages#. This is the doctrine being applied in our jurisdiction wherein the contributory negligence of the plaintiff does not completely bar recovery but merely results in mitigation of liability6 it is a partial defense. The court is free to determine the extent of the mitigation of the defendant<s liability depending upon the circumstances.
IN
CIVIL LAW
0. IM($TED CONTRI;$TORNEGLIGENCE Negligence is imputed if the actor is different from the person who is being made liable. The defendant will be subject to mitigated liability even if the plaintiff was not himself personally negligent but because the negligence of another is imputed to the plaintiff. It is applicable if the negligence was on the part of the person for whom the plaintiff is responsible, and especially, by negligence of an associate in the transaction where he was injured. 2. +ORT$ITO$S E:ENTS Essential requisites% a. The cause of the unforeseen and unexpected occurrence, or of the failure of the debtor to comply with his obligation, must be independent of the human will6 b. It must be impossible to foresee the event which constitutes the Ecaso fortuito,F or if it can be CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
foreseen, it must be impossible to avoid6 c. The occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for the debtor to fulfill his obligation in a normal manner6 and d. The obligor must be free from any participation in the aggravation of the injury resulting to the creditor. NOTE: 5hen an act of )od concurs with the negligence of defendant to produce an injury, the defendant is liable if the injury would not have resulted but for his own negligent conduct or omission. The whole occurrence is humaniGed and removed from the rules applicable to acts of )od. !%A!,C,R vs. CA ?1113@" G$%$RA& R'&$( It is a complete defense and a person is not liable if the cause of the damage is a fortuitous event. $)C$!*+,%( It is merely a partial defense and the courts may mitigate the damages if the loss would have resulted in any event ! Art. 221./0# Civil Code". 4. ASS$M(TION O+ RISK )olenti non fit in*uria@ One is not legally injured if he has consented to the act complained of or was willing that it should occur. It is a complete defense. Elements(
a. The plaintiff must 3now that the ris3 is present6 b. =e must further understand its nature6 and that c. =is choice to incur it is free and voluntary. +I,-S%
a. E3 ress <ai5er of t/e rig/t to reco5er

22$
MEMORY AID There is assumption of ris3 if the

plaintiff, in advance has expressly waived his right to recover damages for the negligent act of the defendant. NOTE: A person cannot contract away his right to recover damages resulting from negligence. &uch waiver is contrary to public policy and cannot be allowed. =owever, the waiver contemplated by this prohibition is the waiver of the right to recover :e9ore the negligent act was committed. If waiver was made a9ter the cause of action accrued, the waiver is valid and may be construed as a condonation of the obligation.
IN
CIVIL LAW
4 As to abnormal ris3s, there must be cogent and convincing evidence of consent. b" 5hen a passenger boards a common carrier, he ta3es the ris3s incidental to the mode of travel he has ta3en. iii. =angerous Activities %ersons who voluntarily participate in dangerous activities assume the ris3s which are usually present in such activities. :HAB%':@ A professional athlete is deemed to assume the ris3s of injury to their trade. iv. =e9endantCs negligence 5hen the plaintiff is aware of the ris3 created by the defendant<s negligence, yet he voluntarily decided to proceed to encounter it, there is an implied admission. :HAB%':@ If the plaintiff has been supplied with a product which he 3nows to be unsafe, he is deemed to have assumed the ris3 of using such unsafe product.
1.
I" lied Assu" tions
i. =angerous Conditions A person who, 3nowing that he is exposed to a dangerous condition voluntarily assumes the ris3 of such dangerous condition may not recover from the defendant who maintained such dangerous conditions. :xample@ A person who main4 tained his house near a railroad trac3 assumes the usual dangers attendant to the opera4tion of a locomotive. !Rodrigueza vs. 3anila Railroad Co., GR %o. 1.488, %ov. 11, 1121". ii. Contractual Relations There may be implied assumption of ris3 if the plaintiff entered into a contractual relation with the defendant. y entering into a relationship freely and voluntarily where the negligence of the defendant is obvious, the plaintiff may be found to accept and consent to it. :HAB%':&@
6. DEAT, O+ T,E DE+ENDANT #eath of the defendant does not extinguish the obligation based on (uasi4 delict. An action survives even if the defendant dies during the pendency of the case if the case is an action to recover for an injury to persons or property by reason of tort committed by the deceased. It is no defense at all. 7. (RESCRI(TION An action based on (uasi4delict prescribes in four years from the date of the accident. !Article 1104 Civil Code" Relations ;ac& Doctrine
a" The employees assume the ordinary ris3s inherent in the industry in which he is employed. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

225
MEMORY AID
An act done at one time is considered by fiction of law to have been done at some antecedent period. !Allied 7an8ing Cor6 vs. CA, 1181" :HAB%':@ A doctor negligently transfused blood to a patient that was contaminated with =ID. If the effect became apparent only after five !1" years, the four !-" year prescriptive period should commence only when it was discovered.
IN
CIVIL LAW
8. IN:OL$NTARINESS It is a complete defense in (uasi4 delict cases and the defendant is therefore not liable if force was exerted on him. !Aquino, *orts and =a ages" :HAB%':@ 5hen the defendant was forced to drive his vehicle by armed men. =e was, at pain of death, forced to drive at a very fast clip because the armed men were escaping from the policemen. The defendant cannot be held liable, if a bystander is hit as a conse(uence.
CA$SATION (ro3i"ate Cause That cause which in natural and continuous se(uence, unbro3en by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, without which the result would not have occurred. Re"ote Cause That cause which some independent force merely too3 advantage of to accomplish something not the natural effect thereof. Nearest Cause That cause which is the last lin3 in the chain of events6 the nearest in point of time or relation. %roximate cause is not necessarily the nearest cause but that which is the procuring efficient and predominant cause. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Concurrent Causes The actor is liable even if the active and substantially simultaneous operation of the effects of a third person<s innocent, tortious or criminal act is also a substantial factor in bringing about the harm so long as the actor<s negligent conduct actively and continuously operate to bring about harm to another. !A9rica vs. Calte5" 5here several causes producing the injury are concurrent and each is an efficient cause without which the injury would not have happened, the injury may be attributed to all or any of the causes and recovery may be had against any or all of the responsible persons. 5here the concurrent or successive negligent acts or omissions of two or more persons, although acting independently, are in combination the direct and proximate cause of a single injury to a third person, and it is impossible to determine what proportion each contributed to the injury, either of them is responsible for the whole injury, even though his act alone might not have caused the entire injury6 they become joint tort4feasors and are solidarily liable for the resulting damage under Article .*?- of the $ivil $ode.
NOTE: %rimary cause remains the proximate cause even if there is an intervening cause which merely cooperated with the primary cause and which did not brea3 the chain of causation. Tests of (ro3i"ate Cause *Do-6art test *. $ause4in4fact Test .. %olicy Test NOTE: In determining the proximate cause of the injury, it is first necessary to determine if the defendant<s negligence was the cause4in4fact of the damage to the plaintiff. !Cause-in-9act test" If the defendant<s negligence was not

226
MEMORY AID
the cause4in4fact, the in(uiry stops. If it is, the in(uiry shifts to the (uestion of limit of the defendant<s liability. !!olic2 test" CA$SE%IN%+ACT TESTS: 1. .ut/&or #est The defendant<s conduct is the cause4in4fact if damage would not have resulted had there been no negligence on the part of the defendant. $onversely, defendant<s negligent conduct is not the cause in fact of the plaintiff<s damage if the accident could not have been avoided in the absence thereof. 2. Substantial &actor test The conduct is the cause4in4fact of the damage if it was a su:stantial 9actor in producing the injuries. In order to be a substantial factor in producing the harm, the causes set in motion by the defendant must continue until the moment of the damage or at least down the setting in motion of the final active injurious force which immediately produced or preceded the damage. NOTE: If the defendant<s conduct was already determined to be the cause in fact of the plaintiff<s damage under the :ut 9or test, it is necessarily the cause in fact of the damage under the su:stantial 9actor test. 3. ,ESS #est The candidate condition may still be termed as a cause where it is shown to be a necessary element in just one of several co-6resent causal set each independently sufficient for the effect. T<o <a*s 1* </ic/ co% resence "a* "anifest itself: a. -uplicati!e causation 5hen two or more sets operate simultaneously to produce the effect6 the effect is over4 determined. b. Pre/empti!e causation 5hen, though coming about first in time, one causal set tru 6s another potential set lur3ing in the CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
bac3ground6 the causal potency of the latter is frustrated.
0ultiple causation If there are a number of candidate conditions, which, ta3en one at a time, would not in fact have been sufficient to cause the accident and the accident was a cumulative effect of all the candidate conditions. (olic* Tests: *. 9oreseeability Test .. Natural and %robable $onse(uence Test 0. Natural and Ordinary or #irect $onse(uence Test -. =indsight Test 1. Orbit of 2is3 Test /. &ubstantial 9actor Test (olic* Tests "a* 1e di5ided into T<o Grou s: .. +ORESIG,T (ERS(ECTI:E? +ORESEEA;ILIT- TESTS The defendant is not liable for the unforeseeable conse(uences of his acts 'iability is limited within the ris3 created by defendants< negligent acts. 0. DIRECT (ERSE(ECTI:E? DIRECT COSE#$ENCES TESTS The defendant is liable for damages which are beyond the ris3. #irect conse(uences are those which follow in se(uence from the effect of defendants act upon conditions existing and forces already in operation at the time without intervention of any external forces, which come into active operation later. Tests a lied in t/e (/ili ines: New $ivil $ode has a chapter on #amages which specifies the 3ind of damage for which the defendant may be held liable and the extent of damage to be awarded to the plaintiff. Cause%in%fact Tests: *. ut4for test .. &ubstantial 9actor test 0. N:&& test

227
MEMORY AID
(olic* test@ The directness approach is being applied in this jurisdiction. NOTE: The definition of proximate cause which includes the element of foresight is not consistent with the express provision of the Article ..,. of the New $ivil $ode6 a person may be held liable whether the damage to the plaintiff may be unforeseen. Cause and Conditions It is no longer practicable to distinguish between cause and condition. The defendant may be liable even if only created conditions, if the conditions resulted in harm to either person or property. :HAB%':& of =angerous Conditions( *. Those that are inherently dangerous .. Those where a person places a thing which is not dangerous in itself in a dangerous position. 0. Those involving products and other things which are dangerous because they are defective. Efficient Inter5ening Cause One which destroys the causal connection between the negligent act and the injury and thereby negatives liability. There is NO efficient intervening cause if the force created by the negligent act or omission have either@ *. 2emained active itself, or .. $reated another force which remained active until it directly caused the result, or 0. $reated a new active ris3 of being acted upon by the active force that caused the result. :HAB%':@ The medical findings, show that the infection of the wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time >avier was wounded to the time of his death. !!eo6le vs. Rellin 77 !"il 1038" NOTES: A cause is not an intervening cause if it was already in operation at the time the negligent act is committed. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
9oreseeable
intervening causes cannot be considered sufficient intervening causes. The intervention of unforeseen and unexpected cause is not sufficient to relieve the wrongdoer from conse(uences of negligence if such negligence directly and proximately cooperates with the independent cause in the resulting injury. CONTRI;$TOR- NEGLIGENCE A. (laintiff@s negligence is t/e cause %laintiff<s negligence is not contributory if it is necessary and sufficient to produce the result. :HAB%':&( *. Only the plaintiff was negligent. .. #efendant<s negligence is not a part of the causal set which is a part of the causal chain. 0. %laintiff<s negligence was pre4 emptive in nature. ;. Co" ound Causes %laintiff<s negligence may have duplicative effect, that it, it is sufficient to bring about the effect but his negligence occurs simultaneously with the defendant6 the latter<s negligence is e(ually su99icient but not necessar2 to bring about the effect because damage would still have resulted due to the negligence of the plaintiff. %laintiff<s negligence is not merely contributory because it is a concurring proximate cause. No recovery can be had. !Aquino, *orts and =a ages" C. (art of t/e sa"e causal set Neither plaintiff<s negligence nor defendant<s negligence alone is sufficient to cause the injury6 the effect would result only if both are present together with normal bac3ground conditions. Negligence of the plaintiff cooperated with the negligence of the defendant in order to bring about the injury6 determination of proximate cause

22
MEMORY AID
is only a matter participation. of degree of
IN
CIVIL LAW
D. Defendant@s Negligence is t/e Onl* cause #efendant<s negligence was su99icient AN# necessar2 to bring about the injury. =owever, if plaintiff<s negligence increased or aggravated the resulting damage or injury liability of the defendant should also be mitigated under contri:utor2 negligence rule or under the doctrine o9 avoida:le consequences. Doctrine of Last Clear C/ance or Disco5ered (eril The negligence of the plaintiff does not preclude a recovery for the negligence of the defendant where it appears that the defendant, by exercising reasonable care and prudence, might have avoided injurious conse(uences to the plaintiff notwithstanding the plaintiff<s negligence. Alternati5e :ie<s: .. (re5ailing 5ie< #octrine is applicable in this jurisdiction. :ven if plaintiff was guilty of antecedent negligence, the defendant is still liable because he had the last clear chance of avoiding the injury. 0. Minorit* :ie< The historical function of the doctrine was to mitigate the harshness of the common law rule of contributory negligence which prevented any recovery at all by the plaintiff who was also negligent even if his negligence was relatively minor as compared with the wrongful act or omission of the defendant. The doctrine has no role in this jurisdiction where common law concept of contributory negligence has itself been rejected in Article .*+? of the $ivil $ode. 2. T/ird :ie< CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
There can be no conflict between the doctrine of last clear chance and doctrine of comparative negligence if the former is viewed as a rule or phrase of proximate cause6 =owever, the doctrine of last clear chance is no longer applicable if the force created by the plaintiff<s negligence continues until the happening of the injurious event. Cases </en t/e doctrine <as /eld ina lica1le '(ICCA) *. If the laintiff was not negligent. .. The party charged is re(uired to act instantaneously, and if the injury cannot be avoided by the application of all the means at hand after the peril is or should have been discovered. 0. If defendant<s negligence is a concurrent cause and which was still in operation up to the time the injury was inflicted. -. 5here the plaintiff, a passenger, filed an action against a carrier based on contract. 1. If the actor, though negligent, was not aware of the danger or ris3 brought about by the prior fraud or negligent act.
;. INTENTIONAL TORTS Include conduct where the actor desires to cause the conse(uences of his act or believes that the conse(uences are substantially certain to result from it.
They are found in $hapter . of the %reliminary Title of the N$$ entitled E=uman 2elationsF. Although this chapter covers negligent acts, the torts mentioned herein are mostly intentional in nature or torts involving malice or bad faith.
,$MAN RELATIONS .. (rinci le 'ART..A) of A1use of Rig/ts

22!
MEMORY AID
Ele"ents:
IN
CIVIL LAW
a. 'egal right or duty6 b. The right or duty is exercised in bad faith6 and c. 9or the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another. :HAB%':@ If the principal unreasonably terminated an agency agreement for selfish reasons. !-alenzuela vs. CA, 110 SCRA 1" NOTE: This rule is a departure from the traditional view that a person is not liable for damages resulting from the exercise of ones right.
*. $ases where there was financial damage. .. &ocial humiliation caused to one of the parties. 0. 5here there was moral seduction. NOTES:
Boral
seduction, although not punishable, connotes the idea of deceit, enticement, superior power or abuse of confidence on the part of the seducer to which the woman has yielded. ! Gas"e S"o8at 7a8s" vs. CA"
0. Article 0B of t/e Ci5il Code
&pea3s of the general sanction for all other provisions of law which do not especially provide for their own sanction. NOTE: Article ., does not distinguish6 the act may be done willfully or negligently.
&exual intercourse is not by itself a

basis for recovery6 damages could only be awarded if the sexual intercourse is not a product of voluntariness or mutual desire.
1. Seduction <it/out ro"ise to "arr*
1reac/
of
2. Acts contra 1onus "ores 'Article 0. Ci5il Code) Ele"ents:
&eduction, by itself, is also an act contrary to morals, good customs and public policy.
a. Act which is legal6 b. The act is contrary to morals, good customs, public order or public policy6 and c. The act is done with intent to injure. NOTE: #amages are recoverable even if no positive law was violated. Kinds:
The defendant is liable if he employed deceit, enticement, superior power or abuse of confidence in successfully having sexual intercourse with another even if he satisfied his lust without promising to marry the offended party.
a. ;reac/ of ro"ise to "arr*
It may not even matter that the plaintiff and the defendant are of the same gender.
G$%$RA& R'&$( reach of promise to marry by itself is not actionable. $)C$!*+,%( In cases where there is another act independent of the breach of promise to marry which gives rise to liability@ CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
c. Se3ual assault

2#"
MEMORY AID
#efendant is liable for all forms of sexual assault including crimes defined under the 2%$ as rape, acts of lasciviousness and seduction.
IN
CIVIL LAW
In the field of tort, trespass extends to all cases where a person is deprived of his personal property even in the absence of criminal liability. NOTE: It may cover cases where the defendant was deprived of personal property for the purpose of obtaining possession of real property
d. Desertion 1* a s ouse
A spouse has a legal obligation to live with hisIher spouse. If a spouse does not perform hisIher duty to the other, he may be liable for damages for such omission because the same is contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy.
:HAB%':@ The defendant who was landlord, was held liable because he deprived the plaintiffs, his tenants, of water in order to force them to vacate the lot they were cultivating. !3ag:anua vs. +AC 137 SCRA 3.2" 3# =isconnection o9 electricit2 or gas service
e. Tres ass (ro ert*
and
De ri5ation
of
The
. JIN#&@ 1# *res6ass to andEor de6rivation o9 real 6ro6ert2
right to disconnect and deprive the customer, who unreasonably fails to pay his bills, of electricity should be exercised in accordance with the law and rules.
:xample@ If a company disconnects

'iability for damages under the 2%$ and Article -1* of the $ivil $ode re(uires intent or bad faith. the electricity service without prior notice as re(uired by the rules, the company commits a tort under Article .* N$$.
Article --A of the $ivil $ode in relation to Article -1/ does not permit action for damages where the builder, planter, or sower acted in good faith. The landowner is limited to the options given to him under article --A, that is to appropriate whatever is built or planted or to compel the builder or planter to purchase the portion encroached upon. !A(uino, Torts and #amages"
f.
A1ortion and 9rongful Deat/
#amages may be recovered by both spouses if@ *" the abortion was caused through the physician<s negligence, or ." was done intentionally Dit"out t"eir consent
A builder in good faith who acted negligently may be held liable under Art. .*+/ N$$. 2# *res6ass to or de6rivation o9 6ersonal 6ro6ert2 CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
=usband of a woman who voluntarily procured her abortion may recover damages from the physician who caused the same on account of distress and

2#1
MEMORY AID
mental anguish attendant to the loss of the unborn child and the disappointment of his parental expectation. ! Geluz vs. CA 2SCRA802"
IN
CIVIL LAW
Ele"ents:
g. Illegal Dis"issal
*. The fact of the prosecution and the further fact that the defendant was himself the prosecutor6 and that the action was finally terminated with an ac(uittal6 .. That in bringing the action, the prosecutor acted without probable cause6 0. The prosecutor was actuated or impelled by legal malice.
The right of the employer to dismiss an employee should not be confused with the manner in which the right is exercised and the effects flowing therefrom6
If the dismissal was done anti4 socially and oppressively, the employer should be deemed to have violated Article *+,* of the $ivil $ode !which prohibits acts of oppression by either capital or labor against the other" and Article .* N$$.
NOTES:
An employer may be held liable for damages if the manner of dismissing is contrary to morals good customs and public policy.
Balice is the inexcusable intent to injure, oppress, vex, annoy or humiliate. %resence of probable cause signifies absence of malice.
:HAB%':@ 9alse imputation of misdeed to justify dismissal or any similar manner of dismissal which is done abusively.
Absence of malice signifies good faith on the part of the defendant6 good faith may even be based on mista3e of law.
/. Malicious (rosecution
An action for damages brought by one against another whom a criminal prosecution, civil suit, or other legal proceeding has been instituted maliciously and without probable cause, after the termination of such prosecution, suit or proceeding in favor of the defendant therein.
Ac(uittal presupposes that a criminal information is filed in court and final judgment rendered dismissing the case6 nevertheless, prior ac(uittal may include dismissal by the prosecutor after preliminary investigation. !Glo:e 3ac8a2 and Radio Cor6. vs. CAF 3anila Gas Cor6 vs. CA"
i.
(u1lic ,u"iliation
The gist of the action is putting legal process in force regularly, for mere purpose of vexation or injury. !=rilon vs. CA ?1117@" CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
#amages may be awarded in cases where the plaintiff suffered humiliation through the positive acts of the defendant directed against the plaintiff.
:xample@ The defendant was held liable for damages under Art. .* for

2#2
MEMORY AID
slapping the plaintiff in public. ! !atricio vs. Bon. ,scar &eviste, ?1181@"
IN
CIVIL LAW
NOTES:
Cnder Article .*, damages are recoverable even though no positive law was violated. An action can only prosper when damage, material or otherwise, was suffered by the plaintiff. An action based on Articles *?4.* will be dismissed if the plaintiff merely see3s GrecognitionH. Cnder Articles *? and .*, the defendant may li3ewise be guilty of a tort even if he acted in good 9ait". !Grand 'nion Su6er ar8et vs. $s6ino" TORTS AGAINST ,$MAN DIGNITT-(ES: .. :iolation of t/e rig/t of ri5ac* Reasona:leness o9 a 6ersonCs e56ectation o9 6rivac2 de6ends on a tDo-6art test( a" 5hether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of privacy. b" 5hether this expectation is one that the society recogniGes as reasonable. NOTES: G$%$RA& R'&$@ 2ight to privacy can be invo3ed only by natural persons6 >uridical persons cannot invo3e such right because the entire basis of right to privacy is an injury to the feelings and sensibilities of a party, a corporation would have no such ground. $)C$!*+,%( 2ight against unreasonable searches and seiGure can be invo3ed by a juridical entity.
0" The right ceases upon the death of the person. $)C$!*+,%( A privilege may be given to the surviving relatives of a deceased person to protect his memory but the privilege exist for the benefit of the living, to protect their feelings and to prevent the violation of their own rights in the character and memory of the deceased. &tandard to be applied in determining if there was a violation of the right is that of a 6erson Dit" ordinar2 sensi:ilities. It is relative to the customs of time and place and is determined by the norm of an ordinary person. +our T* es of In5asion of (ri5ac* a. Intrusio n upon plaintiff1s seclusion or solitu e or into his pri!ate affairs It is not limited to cases where the defendant physically trespassed into another<s property. It includes cases when the defendant invades one<s privacy by loo3ing from outside !:xample@ Epeeping4tomF". G$%$RA& R'&$@ There is no invasion of right to privacy when a journalist records photographs or writes about something that occurs in public places. $)C$!*+,%( 5hen the acts of the journalist should be to such extent that it constitutes harassment or overGealous shadowing. The freedom of the press has never been construed to accord newsmen immunity from tort or crimes committed during the course of the newsgathering. There is no intrusion when an employer investigates an employee or when the school investigates its student. 2A -.,, ma3es it illegal for any person not authoriGed by all the parties to any private communication to secretly record such communication by means of a tape recorder !2amireG vs $A, &ept. .A, *??1" Cse of a telephone extension for purposes of overhearing a private conversation without authoriGation does not violate 2A -.,,.
G$%$RA& R'&$@ 2ight to privacy is purely personal in nature, hence@ *" It can be invo3ed only by the person whose privacy is claimed to have been violated. ." It can be subject to waiver of the person whose privacy is sought to be intruded into.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

2##
MEMORY AID
NOTE: There are instances where the school might be called upon to exercise its power over its student for acts committed outside the school premises and beyond school hours in the following@ *. In cases of violation of school policies or regulations occurring in connection with school sponsored activity off4campus6 or .. In cases where the misconduct of the student involves his status as a student or affects the good name and reputation of the school. 1. Publicat ion of Embarrassin" (ri5ate +acts Re!uisites: *. %ublicity is given to any private or purely personal information about a person6 .. 5ithout the latter<s consent6 and 0. 2egardless of whether or not such publicity constitutes a criminal offense, li3e libel or defamation, the circumstance that the publication was made with intent of gain or for commercial and business purposes invariably serves to aggravate the violation of the right. %C 'I$ 9I)C2: 4 A person, who by his accomplishments, fame or mode of living or by adopting a profession or calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs and his character. NOTE: %ublic figures, most especially those holding responsible positions in government enjoy a ore li ited right to privacy compared to ordinary individuals. The interest sought to be protected is the right to be free from unwarranted publicity, from the wrongful publiciGing of the private affairs and activities of an individual which are outside the realm of legitimate public concern. The publication of facts derived from the records of official proceedings which are not otherwise declared by law as confidential, CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
cannot be considered a tortious conduct. c. Publicit ( $hich places a person in a false li"ht in the public e(e The interest to be protected in this tort is the interest of the individual in not being made to appear before the public in an objectionable false light or false position. :HAB%':@ #efendant was held liable for damages when he published an unauthoriGed biography of a famous baseball player exaggerating his feats on the baseball field, portraying him as a war hero. ! S6a"n vs. 3essner" If the publicity given to the plaintiff is defamatory, hence an action for libel is also warranted6 the action for invasion of privacy will afford an alternative remedy. Bay be committed by the media by distorting a news report. Tort of (utting Anot/er in +alse Lig/t Defa"ation
1. As to "ra!amen of claim The gravamen of The gravamen of claim is not the claim is the reputa4 reputational harm tional harm but rather the embarrassment of a person being made into some4thing he is not 2. As to publication The statement should %ublication is be actually made in satisfied if a letter is public sent to a third person 3. As to the efamator( character of the statements #efendant may still 5hat is published be held liable even if lowers the esteem in the statements tells which the plaintiff is something good held about the plaintiff
. Commer cial appropriation of li2eness The unwarranted publication of a person<s name or the unauthoriGed use of his photograph or li3eness for

2#$
MEMORY AID
commercial purposes is an invasion of privacy. 5ith respect to celebrities, however, the right of publicity is often treated as a separate right that overlaps but is distinct from the right of privacy. They treat their names and li3eness as property and they want to control and profit therefrom. 0. Interference <it/ +a"il* and ot/er relations The gist of the tort is an interference with one spouse<s mental attitude toward the other and the conjugal 3indness of marital relations resulting in some actual conduct which materially affects it. It extends to all cases of wrongful interference in the family affairs of others whereby one spouse is induced to leave the other spouse or conduct himself or herself that the comfort of married life is destroyed. If the interference is by the parents of the spouse, malice must be proven. 2. Intriguing to Cause Alienation 4. :e3ation and ,u"iliation #iscrimination against a person on account of his physical defect, which causes emotional distress, may result in liability on the part of the offending party. &exual =arassment falls under this category. 4 a civil action separate and distinct from the criminal action may be commenced under 2A +A++. 4 . types of &exual harassment@ a" (uid pro (uo cases b" hostile environment cases TORTS 9IT, INDE(ENDENT CI:IL ACTIONS .. :iolation of ci5il and olitical rig/ts 'Article 20) Although the same normally involves intentional acts, it can also be committed through negligence. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
%ublic officer who is a defendant cannot escape liability under the doctrine of state immunity6 the said doctrine applies only if acts involved are done by officers in the performance of their official duty within the ambit of their powers6 officers do not act within the ambit of their powers if they violate the constitutional rights of persons.
0. Defa"ation= +raud= and (/*sical in>uries 'Article 22) A. -efamation #efamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation and good name, by communication to others which tends to diminish the esteem in which the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse feelings or opinion against him. Includes the crime of libel and slander. 2%$ considers the statement defamatory if it is an imputation of circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of natural or juridical person or to blac3en the memory of one who is dead. Re!uisites for one to 1e lia1le for defa"ator* i" utations: a. It must be defamatory b. It must be malicious c. It must be given publicity d. The victim must be identifiable NOTES:
Test in determining the defamatory character of the imputation@ A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose and understand that the personIs against whom they were uttered were guilty of a certain offense, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to hold the personIs up to public ridicule. #issemination to a number of persons is not re(uired, communication to a single individual is sufficient publication.

2#5
MEMORY AID
G$%$RA& R'&$( :very defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention or justifiable motive for ma3ing it is shown. $)C$!*+,%S( *. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty6 and .. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remar3s, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report, or speech delivered in said proceedings or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions.
It is not sufficient that the offended party recogniGed himself as the person attac3ed or defamed, it must be shown that at least a third person could identify him as the object of the libelous publication. In order to escape liability, the defendant may claim that the statements made are privileged. T<o &inds of ri5ileged co""unication: *" Absolutely privilege 8 Those which are not actionable even if the author acted in bad faith. ." Kualifiedly privilege 8 not actionable unless found to have been made without good intention or justifiable motive. .. &rau Ele"ents of deceit *"The defendant must have made false representation to the plaintiff ."The representation must be one of fact 0"The defendant must 3now that the representation is false or be rec3less about whether it is false -"The defendant must have acted on the false representation CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
1"The defendant must have intended that the false representation should be acted on /"The plaintiff must have suffered damage as a result of acting on the false representation Bal9-trut"s are li3ewise included6 it is actionable if the withholding of that which is not stated ma3es that which is stated absolutely false. Bisrepresentati on upon a mere matter of opinion is not an actionable deceit. C. Ph(sical in*uries attery 8 an intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive bodily contact6 bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable person<s sense of dignity. Assault 8 intentional conduct by one person directed at another which places the latter in apprehension of immediate bodily harm or offensive act. Includes bodily injuries causing death. %hysical injuries which resulted because of negligence or imprudence is not included in Article 006 they are already covered by Article .*+/ of the $ivil $ode. 2. Neglect of dut* 1* olice officers 'Article 24) &ubsidiary liability of cities and municipalities, is imposed so that they will exercise great care in selecting conscientious and duly (ualified policemen and exercise supervision over them in the performance of their duties. CI:IL LIA;ILIT- ARISING +ROM DELICT :very person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. ! Article 100 R!C" The reason is because a crime has a dual character@ as an offense against the &tate and against the private person injured by it.

2#6
MEMORY AID
#ual character of crimes applies to cases governed by special laws. :xample@ violation of the % .. results in criminal and civil liability. There is civil liability even if the offense is a public offense, li3e in bigamy. %ersons liable are the principal, accomplice and accessories. It includes restitution, reparation of damages and indemnification of conse(uential damages. The rule on proximate cause in (uasi4delict cases is applicable to cases involving civil liability arising from delict. Art. ..,., N$$
IN
CIVIL LAW
5hile pardon removes the existence of guilt so that in the eyes of the law the offender is deemed innocent and treated as though he never committed the offence, it does not operate to remove all the effects of the previous conviction. DE+ENDANTS IN TORT CASES Concurrent Negligence or Acts .. Coint Tort%feasors All the persons who command, instigate, promote, encourage, advice, countenance, cooperate in, aid, or abet the commission of a tort, or who approve of it after it is done, if done for their benefit6 they are each liable as a principal, to the same extent and in the same manner as if they have performed the wrongful act themselves. The responsibility of two or more persons liable for (uasi4delict is solidary !Article 2110 Civil Code"6 they are not liable pro rata, they are jointly and severally liable for the whole amount. 0. Motor 5e/icle "is/a s The owner is solidarily liable with the driver, if the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of due diligence, prevented the misfortune. !Article 2180 Civil Code" &olidary liability is imposed on the owner not because of his imputed liability but because his own omission is a concurring proximate cause of the injury. :icarious Lia1ilit* or Doctrine of I" uted Negligence A person is not only liable for torts committed by himself, but also for torts committed by others with whom he has a certain relation or for whom he is responsible. !Article 2180 Civil Code" :xercise of diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage is a defense. Doctrine of Respon eat Superior 8 the liability is strictly imputed, the employer is liable not because of his act or omission but because of the act or
Circu"stances affecting Ci5il Lia1ilit* .. Custif*ing circu"stances #efendant is free from civil liability if justifying circumstances are properly establishes. 0. E3e" ting Circu"stances They do not erase the civil liability. 2. Mitigating and Aggra5ating Circu"stances #amages to be adjudicated may either be decreased or increased depending on the presence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Effect of Deat/ A. #:AT= A9T:2 9INA' >C#)B:NT@ extinguishes criminal liability of the person liable but will not extinguish the civil liability. . #:AT= :9O2: 9INA' >C#)B:NT@ G$%$RA& R'&$@ The defendant is relieved from both criminal and civil liability arising from criminal liability. $)C$!*+,%( In case of libel and physical injuries wherein the plaintiff initially opted to claim damages in the criminal proceeding can file another case under Article 33 o9 t"e Civil Code. Effect of (ardon %ardon does not erase civil liability. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

2#7
MEMORY AID
omission of the employee6 employer cannot escape liability by claiming that he exercised due diligence in the selection or supervision of the employee. G$%$RA& R'&$( Dicarious liability in the %hilippines is not governed by the doctrine of res6ondeat su6erior6 employers or parents are made liable not only because of the negligent or wrongful act of the person for whom they are responsible but also because of their own negligence@ *" 'iability is imposed on the employer because he failed to exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the employee ." %arents are made liable because they failed to exercise due diligence $)C$!*+,%( #octrine of res6ondeat su6erior is applicable in@ *" liability of employers under Article *,0 of the 2%$ ." liability of a partnership for the tort committed by a partner (ersons :icariousl* Lia1le: 'Article 2134 of the Ci!il Co e5 .. T/e +at/er= or in case of deat/ or inca acit*= "ot/er
IN
CIVIL LAW
The same foreseability test of

negligence should apply to parents when they are sought to be held liable under Art. .*A,, N$$
The liability is not limited to

parents, imposed substitute authority, the same is also on those exercising and special parental i.e., guardian.
The liability is present only both

under Art .*A, of the N$$ and Art ..* of the 9amily $ode if the child is living in his parents< company.
%arental authority is not the sole

basis of liability. A teacher in charge is still liable for the acts of their students even if the minor student reaches the age of majority.
The parents or guardians can still

be held liable even if the minor is already emancipated provided that he is below .* years of age.
a" b"
9or damage caused by@ minor children living in their company
%arents
and other persons exercising parental authority can escape liability by proving that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damages. !Art. .*A,"
This has already been modified by Art. ..* of the 9amily $ode to the extent that the alternative (ualification of the liability of the father and the mother has been removed.
The burden of proof rests on the

parents and persons exercising parental authority.
NOTES:
The basis of liability for the acts

or omissions of their minor children is the parental authority that they exercise over them, except for children *A to .*. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
0. Guardians 9or damage caused by a. minors or incapacitated persons b. under their authority c. living in their company 2. O<ners and "anagers esta1lis/"ents 9or damage caused by@ of

2#
MEMORY AID
a" their employees b" in the service of the branches in which they are employed, or c" on the functions occasion of their
IN
CIVIL LAW
a" a special agent b" not when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the tas3 done properly pertains %ublic officers who are guilty of tortuous conduct are personally liable for their actions.
4. E" lo*ers 9or damages cause by@ a" employees helpers and household
b" acting within the scope of their assigned tas3s c" even if the employer is not engaged in any business or industry
7. Sc/ools= Teac/ers and Ad"inistrators 9or damage caused by@ a" pupils and students or apprentices b" in their custody statutor2 :asis@ if student is minor 8 Art. .*?, 9$ if student is no longer a minor 8 Art. .*A,, $ivil $ode NOTES:
NOTES:
Applies also to teachers of

academic institutions. 'iability attaches to the teacher4 in4charge.
'iability of the employer can be

established by proving the existence of an employer4employee relationship with the actor and the latter caused the injury while performing his assigned tas3 or functions. The vicarious liability attaches only when the tortuous conduct of the employees relates to or is in the course of his employment.
The school itself is now solidarily

liable with charge. the teacher4in4
The liability extends to acts

committed even outside the school so long as it is an official activity of the school.
5hile
the employer incurs no liability when an employee<s conduct, act or omission is beyond the range of employment, a minor deviation from the assigned tas3 of an employee, however does not affect the liability of an employer. !-alenzuela vs. CA, 2.3 SCRA 303" It is a defense that the employer exercised proper diligence in the selection and supervision of negligent employee. 6. State 9or damage caused by@ CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
5henever the school or teacher

is being made liable, the parents and those exercising substitute parental authority are not free from liability because Art. .*? of the 9amily $ode expressly provides that they are subsidiarily liable.
Art. .*A, ma3es teachers and

heads liable for acts of students and apprentices whether the latter are minors or not.

2#!
MEMORY AID
G$%$RA& R'&$( The teacher4in4charge is liable for the acts of his students. The school and administrators are not liable. $)C$!*+,%( It is only the head of the school, not the teacher who is held liable where the injury is caused in a school of arts and trade. The liability of the teacher subsists whether the school is academic or non4 academic. 'iability is imposed only if the pupil is already in the custody of the teacher or head. The student is in the custody of the school authorities as longs as he is under the control and influence of the school and within its premises whether the semester had not yet begun or has already ended. The victim of negligence is li3ewise re(uired to exercise due care in avoiding injury to himself.
Ot/er (ersons :icariousl* Lia1le: .. Inn&ee ers and ,otel&ee ers They are ci!ill( liable for crimes committed in their establishments in cases of violations of statutes by them, in default of persons criminally liable. !Article 102 Revised !enal Code" They are subsi iaril( liable for the restitution of goods ta3en by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for payment of the value thereof, provided that@ a. The inn3eeper was notified in advance of the deposit of such goods within the inn6 and b. The guest shall have followed the directions which such inn3eeper or his representative may have given with respect to the care and vigilance over the goods. 0. (artners/i %artnership or every partner is liable for torts committed by one of the partners acting Dit"in t"e sco6e o9 t"e 9ir :usiness, though they do not CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
IN
CIVIL LAW
participate in, ratify, or have 3nowledge of such torts. %artners are liable as joint tort4 feasors. Dicarious liability is similar to the common law rule on res6ondeat su6erior. 'iability is entirely imputed and the partnership cannot obviously invo3e diligence in the selection and supervision of the partner. 2. S ouses a. a:solute co unit2 o9 6ro6ert2 The absolute community property shall be for liabilities incurred by either spouses by reason of crime or (uasi4delict in case of absence or insufficiency of the exclusive property of the debtor4spouse. !Article 10 ;a il2 Code" %ayments shall be considered advances to be deducted from the share of the debtor spouse upon li(uidation of the community. :. conAugal 6artners"i6 o9 gains
G$%$RA& R'&$( %ecuniary indemni4ties imposed upon the husband or wife are not chargeable against the conjugal partnership but against the separate properties of the wrongdoer. $)C$!*+,%( $onjugal partnership should be made liable@ *" 5hen the profits have inured to the benefit of the partnership, or ." If one of the spouses committed the tort while performing a business or if the act was supposed to benefit the partnership. c. regi e o9 se6aration o9 6ro6ert2 :ach spouse is responsible for hisIher separate obligation.
C. STRICT LIA;ILIT 5hen the person is made liable independent of fault or negligence upon submission of proof of certain facts specified by law. NOTE: &trict liability tort can be committed even if reasonable care was

2$"
MEMORY AID
exercised and regardless of the state of mind of the actor at that time. T-(ES: .. Ani"als
IN
CIVIL LAW
G$%$RA& R'&$( The possessor of an animal or whoever may ma3e use of the same is responsible for the damages which it may cause although it may escape or be lost. $)C$!*+,%( 5hen the damage was caused by force majeure or by the person who suffered the damage. !Article 2183 Civil Code"
NOTES:
If the acts of a third person cannot

be foreseen or prevented, then the situation is similar to that of force majeure and the possessor is not liable. !;rancisco, *orts and =a ages" Art. .*A0 is applicable whether the animal is domestic, domesticated, or wild.
If the mishap was due to the employee<s own notorious negligence, or voluntary act or drun3enness, the employer shall not be liable for compensation. 5hen the employee<s lac3 of due care contri:uted to his death or injury, the compensation shall be e(uitably reduced. If the death or injury is due to the negligence of a fellow4wor3man the latter and the employer shall be solidarily liable for compensation. If a 9elloD-Dor8erCs intentional or malicious act is the only cause of the death or injury, the employer shall not be answerable unless it should be shown that the latter did not exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the plaintiff<s fellow4wor3er. 4. Nuisance
Any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything else which@ a. Injures or endangers the health or safety of others6 b. Annoys or offends the senses6 c. &hoc3s, defies or disregards decency or morality6 d. Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water6 or e. =inders or impairs the user property. !Article 410 Civil Code" of
0. +alling o1>ects The head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof is responsible for damages caused by things thrown or falling from the same. ! Article 2113 Civil Code"
The term E"ead o9 t"e 9a il2F is not limited to the owner of the building, and it may even include the lessee thereof. !=ingcong vs. Ianaan, 72 !"il 10"
2. Lia1ilit* of e" lo*ers
Article *+** of the N$$ imposes an obligation on owners of enterprises and other employers to pay for the death or injuries to their employees. 'iability is strict because it exists even if the cause is purely accidental.
There is strict liability on the part of the owner or possessor of the property where a nuisance is found because he is obliged to abate the same irrespective of the presence or absence of fault or negligence.
:very successive owner or possessor of property who fails or refuses to abate a nuisance in that property started by a
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE


2$1
MEMORY AID
former owner or possessor is liable therefore in the same manner as the one who created it. !Article 484 Civil Code" 6. (roduct lia1ilit* 1* "anufacturers Banufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drin3s, toilet articles and similar goods shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used, although no contractual relation exists. !Article 2187 Civil Code" Ot/er cases of lia1ilit* <it/out fault: *. %roprietor of a building or structure, for damages resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due to lac3 of necessary repairs. . .. reach of implied warranties. 0. $onsumer Act !2.A. +0?-" 8 any 9ilipino or foreign manufacturer, producer and importer, independently of fault shall be liable for redress for damages caused to consumers by defects resulting from@ a. design6 b. manufacture6 c. construction6 d. assembly and erection6 e. formulas and handling and ma3ing up6 or f. presentation or pac3ing of their products as well as for the insufficient or inade(uate information on the use and haGards thereof. -. :ven when an act or event causing damage to another<s property was not due to the fault or negligence of the defendant, the latter shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or event he was benefited. !Art. 23 Civil Code"
IN
CIVIL LAW
2. 6arranties The $onsumer Act recogniGes that the provisions of the $ivil $ode on conditions and warranties shall govern all contracts of sale with conditions and warranties. 2etailer shall be subsidiarily liable under the warranty in case of failure of both the manufacturer and distributor to honor the warranty. %rivity of contract is not necessary. 3. ,e"li"ence In product liability law, certain standards are already imposed by special laws, rules and regulations of proper government agencies6 certain acts or omissions are expressly prohibited by the statutes thereby ma3ing violation thereof negligence per se. It is negligence per se if manufacturer manufactured products which do not comply with the safety standards promulgated by appropriate government agencies. 7. -elict The liability may be based on criminal negli4gence under the 2%$ or violation of any special law. 8. Strict liabilit( Banufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drin3s, toilet articles, and similar goods, shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used although no contractual relation exists. !Article 2187 Civil Code"
(ROD$CT AND SER:ICE LIA;ILITAlternati5e t/eories on 1asis of lia1ilit* 1. &rau or misrepresentation Not all expression of opinion are actionable misrepresentations if they are established to be inaccurate. CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
%rivity of contract is not re(uired. It does not preclude an action based on negligence !(uasi4delict" for the same act of using noxious or harmful substances.
Article ?+ and ?? of the $onsumer Act imposes liability on defective products and services upon manufacturers independent of fault.

2$2
MEMORY AID
Jnowledge of the manufacturer is not important6 the focus is on the condition of the product and not on the conduct of the manufacturer or seller.
IN
CIVIL LAW
DE+ENSES: A. The manufacturer, builder, producer, or importer shall not be liable when it evidences@ *" That it did not place the product on the mar3et ." That although it did place the product on the mar3et such product had no defect 0" That the consumer of third party is solely at fault. ! Article 17 Consu er Act" . The supplier of the services shall not be held liable when it is proven@ *" That there is no defect in the service rendered ." That the consumer of third party is solely at fault. !Article 11 Consu er Act"
Re!uisites: The plaintiff should allege and prove that@ *" The product was defective6 ." The product was manufactured by the defendant6 0" The defective product was the cause of his injury. 4 KINDS O+ DE+ECTI:E (ROD$CTS *. manufacturing defect .. design defect 0. presentation defect -. absence of appropriate warning ;$SINESS TORTS .. Interference of contracts Elements% a. existence of a valid contract b. 3nowledge on the part of the third person of the existence of the contract c. interference of the third person without legal justification. The existence of a contract is necessary and the breach must occur because of the alleged act of interference6 No action can be maintained if the contract is void. Balice is not essential. Ele"ents of ri5ilege to interfere CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
*"The defendant<s purpose is a justifiable one, and ."The actors employ no means of fraud or deception which are regarded as unfair. E3tent of Lia1ilit*: A. 2ule in #aywalt vs. 'a $orporation 0?%=I'1A+ #efendant cannot be held liable for more than the amount for which the contracting party who was induced to brea3 the contract can be held liable. . 2ule under Article ..,* and ..,. $ivil $ode *" If in bad faith@ defendant is liable for all natural and probable conse(uences of his act or omission, whether the same is forseen or unforeseen. ." If in good faith@ defandant is liable only for conse(uences that can be foreseen. 0. Interference <it/ ros ecti5e ad5antage It is a tort committed when there is no contract yet and the defendant is only being sued for inducing another not to enter into a contract. 2. $nfair co" etition. Cnfair $ompetition in agricultural, commercial, or industrial enterprises, or in labor, through the use of force, intimidation , deceit, machination or any unjust or oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise to a right of action by a person who thereby suffers damage. !Article 27 Civil Code" $A&:& IN$'C#:#: a. passing off and disparagement of products b. interference c. misappropriation d. monopolies and predatory pricing 4. Securities Related Torts Kinds a. 9raudulent Transactions

2$#
MEMORY AID
b. Bisstatements or Omission of statement of a material fact re(uired to be stated #efendants are free from liability if they can prove that at the time of the ac(uisition the plaintiff 3new of the untrue statement or if he was aware of the falsity. E3tent of Da"ages: Not exceeding triple the amount of the transaction. (rescri ti5e (eriod: Action must be brought within . years after discovery of facts constituting the cause of action and within 1 yrs after such cause of action accrued. II. DAMAGES DAMAGE The detriment, injury or loss which are occasioned by reason of fault of another in the property or person. DAMAGES The pecuniary compensation, recompense or satisfaction for an injury sustained or as otherwise expressed, the pecuniary conse(uences which the law imposes for the breach of some duty or violation of some rights. DAMN$M A;S#$E >it"out +nAur2# INC$RIA /=a age which the plaintiff. In>ur*
'egal invasion of a legal right
IN
CIVIL LAW
to the
defendant Da"age
'oss, hurt or harm which results from the injury
owed
Da"ages
The recom4 pense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered
NOTES: A complaint for damages is a personal action. !7aritua vs. CA, 247 SCRA 331" %roof of pecuniary loss is necessary to successfully recover actual damages from the defendant. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in case of moral, nominal, temperate, li(uidated or exemplary damages. The assessment of such damages, except li(uidated ones, is left to the discretion of the court according to the circumstances of each case. Kinds of da"ages 'MANTLE) *. Actual or $ompensatory .. Moral 0. Nominal -. Temperate or moderate 1. Li(uidated /. Exemplary or corrective A. ACT$AL OR COM(ENSATORDAMAGES $omprehends not only the value of the loss suffered but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain. Classification: *. =ano e ergente 8 loss of what a person already possesses .. &ucro cessante 8 failure to receive as a benefit that would have pertained to him NOTE: The latter type includes@ *. 'oss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent personal injury.
A person may have suffered physical hurt or injury, but for as long as no legal injury or wrong has been done, there is no liability.
There is no liability even if there is damage because there was no injury.
There can be damage without injury.
In order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of which he complains, he must establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

2$$
MEMORY AID
.. Injury to the plaintiff<s business standing or commercial credit.
IN
CIVIL LAW
In crimes and (uasi4delict, the defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and probable conse(uences of the act and omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen by the defendant. !Article 2202 Civil Code" The amount should be that which would put plaintiff in the same position as he would have been if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is now getting his compensation or reparation. To recover damages, the amount of loss must not only be capable of proof but must actually be proven. Cncertainty as to the precise amount is not necessarily fatal.
They are actual damages. It is due to the plaintiff and not to the counsel. %laintiff must allege the basis of his claim for attorney<s fees in the complaint6 the basis should be one of the ** cases specified in Article 2208 o9 t"e Civil Code.
LOSS O+ EARNING CA(ACIT-: -aria:les considered are( *. life expectancy .. net incomeIearnings +or"ula@
L.I0 x !A,8age of death"M x mo. :arnings x *. .
NOTE: 'ife expectancy is computed as follows@ D 0?2 3 'EB%age at deat/) F Net earnings is the total of the earnings less expenses necessary for the creation of such earnings and less living or other incidental expenses. Loss of rofits Bay be determined by considering the average profit for the preceding years multiplied by the number of years during which the business was affected by the wrongful act or breach. Attorne*@s fees CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Interests Award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory damages actual damages. The rate of interest, as well as the accrual thereof is imposed as follows@ *. 5hen the obligation is breached and it consist of payment of sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money@ a. The interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing6 furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. b. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be *.N per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extra4 judicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article **/? of the $ivil $ode. .. 5hen the obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance or money, is breached@ An interest on the amount of damages to be awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of /N per annum. No interest shall be adjudged on unli(uidated claims or damages, except when or until demand can be established with reasonable certainty. 5here the demand is established with reasonable certainty, the interest shall

2$5
MEMORY AID
begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially. 0. 5hen the judgment of the court awarding the sum of money becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest shall be *.N per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. Doctrine of A5oida1le Conse!uences A party cannot recover damages flowing from conse(uences which the party could reasonably have avoided. It has a reasonable corollary@ a person who reasonably attempts to minimiGe his damages can recover the expenses that he incurred. Doctrine of A5oida1le Conse!uences Acts of the plaintiff occur after the act or omission of the defendant Contri1utor* Negligence %laintiff<s act or omission occurs before or at the time of the act or omission of the defendant
IN
CIVIL LAW
*. There must be an injury whether physical, mental or psychological, clearly sustained by the claimant6 .. There must be a culpable act or omission.6 0. &uch act or omission is the proximate cause of the injury6 -. The damages is predicated on the cases cited in Art...*?. NOTE: The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of a corporation because, being an artificial person, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses. It cannot therefore experience physical suffering and mental anguish which can be experienced only by one having a nervous system.
;. MORAL DAMAGES Includes physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shoc3, social humiliation, and similar injury. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary. G$%$RA& R'&$( The plaintiff must allege and prove@ *. The factual basis for moral damages6 and .. Its causal relation to the defendant<s act $)C$!*+,%( Boral damages may be awarded to the victim in criminal proceedings without the need for pleading of proof of the basis thereof. Re!uisites for a<ard of "oral da"ages:
C. NOMINAL DAMAGES Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recogniGed, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. !Article...* $ivil $ode" &mall sums fixed by the court without regard to the extent of the harm done to the injured party. 'aw presumes damage although actual or compensatory damages are not proven. They are damages in name only and are allowed simply in recognition of a technical injury based on a violation of a legal right. Nominal damages cannot co4exist with actual or compensatory damages. D. TEM(ERATE OR MODERATE DAMAGES These are damages, which are more than nominal but less than compensatory, and may be recovered when the court finds that
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE


2$6
MEMORY AID
some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot be proved with certainty. !Article 2220 Civil Code" In cases where the resulting injury might be continuing and possible future complications directly arising from the injury, while certain to occur are difficult to predict, temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or compensatory damages6 in such cases there is no incompatibility between actual and temperate damages.
IN
CIVIL LAW
E. LI#$IDATED DAMAGES Those agreed upon by the parties in a contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof.
+. EGEM(LARDAMAGES
OR
CORRECTI:E
Imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, li(uidated or compensatory damages.
Re!uisites for t/e a<ard of e3e" lar* da"ages: *. They are imposed by way of example in addition to compensatory damages and Imposed only after the claimants right to them has been established6 .. They cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded6 0. The act must be accompanied by bad faith or done in wanton, fraudulent, oppressive or malevolent manner.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE


Torts

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Beda College of Law

TORTS AND DAMAGES

The 0 3inds of negligence furnish

San Beda College of Law

the selection supervision of employee.

The 2evised %enal $ode punishes or corrects criminal act

%unished only if there is a penal law clearly covering them

'iability is direct and primary in (uasi4 delict

'iability of the employer of the actor4employee is subsidiary in crimes

San Beda College of Law

The law fixes no arbitrary age at

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

a. E3 ress <ai5er of t/e rig/t to reco5er

San Beda College of Law

MEMORY AID There is assumption of ris3 if the

I" lied Assu" tions

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

bac3ground6 the causal potency of the latter is frustrated.

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

,$MAN RELATIONS .. (rinci le 'ART..A) of A1use of Rig/ts

San Beda College of Law

0. Article 0B of t/e Ci5il Code

&exual intercourse is not by itself a

1. Seduction <it/out ro"ise to "arr*

2. Acts contra 1onus "ores 'Article 0. Ci5il Code) Ele"ents:

a. ;reac/ of ro"ise to "arr*

San Beda College of Law

e. Tres ass (ro ert*

. JIN#&@ 1# *res6ass to andEor de6rivation o9 real 6ro6ert2

:xample@ If a company disconnects

A1ortion and 9rongful Deat/

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

The same foreseability test of

The liability is not limited to

The liability is present only both

%arental authority is not the sole

The parents or guardians can still

9or damage caused by@ minor children living in their company

The burden of proof rests on the

The basis of liability for the acts

San Beda College of Law

Applies also to teachers of

'iability of the employer can be

The school itself is now solidarily

The liability extends to acts

5henever the school or teacher

Art. .*A, ma3es teachers and

San Beda College of Law

San Beda College of Law

If the acts of a third person cannot