SECONDDIVISION

AQUINASSCHOOL,G.R.No.184202
Petitioner,
Present:
CARPIO,J.,Chairperson,
versusNACHURA,
PERALTA,
ABAD,and
MENDOZA,JJ.
SPS.JOSEINTONandMA.VICTORIA
S.INTON,ontheirbehalfandon
behalfoftheirminorchild,JOSELUIS
S.INTON,andSR.MARGARITAPromulgated:
YAMYAMIN,OP,
Respondents.January26,2011
xx

DECISION

ABAD,J.:

Thiscaseisabouttheprivateschoolsliabilityfortheoutsidecatechistsact
of shoving a student and kicking him on the legs when he disobeyed her
instructiontoremaininhisseatandnotmovearoundtheclassroom.

TheFactsandtheCase

In1998respondentJoseLuisInton(JoseLuis)wasagradethreestudentat
AquinasSchool(Aquinas).RespondentSisterMargaritaYamyamin(Yamyamin),
a religion teacher who began teaching at that school only in June of that year,
taughtJoseLuisgradethreereligionclass.

On July 14, 1998, while Yamyamin was writing on the blackboard, Jose
Luislefthisassignedseatandwentovertoaclassmatetoplayajokeofsurprising
him. Yamyamin noticed this and sent Jose Luis back to his seat. After a while,
JoseLuisgotupagainandwentovertothesameclassmate.Thistime,unableto
toleratethechildsbehavior,YamyaminapproachedJoseLuisandkickedhimon
thelegsseveraltimes.Shealsopulledandshovedhisheadontheclassmatesseat.
Finally,shetoldthechildtostaywherehewasonthatspotoftheroomandfinish
copyingthenotesontheblackboardwhileseatedonthefloor.

Asaresultoftheincident,respondentsJoseandVictoriaInton(theIntons)
filedanactionfordamagesonbehalfoftheirsonJoseLuisagainstYamyaminand
AquinasbeforetheRegionalTrialCourt(RTC)ofPasigCityinCivilCase67427.
TheIntonsalsofiledacriminalactionagainstYamyaminforviolationofRepublic
Act7610towhichshepleadedguiltyandwassentencedaccordingly.

Withregardtotheactionfordamages,theIntonssoughttorecoveractual,
moral, and exemplary damages, as well as attorneys fees, for the hurt that Jose
Luis and his mother Victoria suffered. The RTC dismissed Victorias personal
claims but ruled in Jose Luis favor, holding Yamyamin liable to him for moral
damagesofP25,000.00,exemplarydamagesofP25,000.00,andattorneysfeesof
[1]
P10,000.00plusthecostsofsuit.

[2]
Notsatisfied,theIntonselevatedthecasetotheCourtofAppeals(CA).
TheyaskedtheCAtoincreasetheawardofdamagesandholdAquinassolidarily
liable with Yamyamin. Finding that an employeremployee relation existed
between Aquinas and Yamyamin, the CA found them solidarily liable to Jose
[3]
Luis.TheCA,however,declinedtoincreasetheawardofdamages. Jose Luis
moved for partial reconsideration but this was denied. Aquinas, for its part,
appealeddirectlytothisCourtfromtheCAdecisionthroughapetitionforreview
oncertiorari.

TheIssuePresented

ThesoleissuepresentedinthiscaseiswhetherornottheCAwascorrectin
holdingAquinassolidarilyliablewithYamyaminforthedamagesawardedtoJose
Luis.

TheCourtsRuling

The CA found Aquinas liable to Jose Luis based on Article 2180 of the
Civil Code upon the CAs belief that the school was Yamyamins employer.
Aquinasconteststhis.

The Court has consistently applied the fourfold test to determine the
existence of an employeremployee relationship: the employer (a) selects and
engagestheemployee(b)payshiswages(c)haspowertodismisshimand(d)
has control over his work. Of these, the most crucial is the element of control.
Controlreferstotherightoftheemployer,whetheractuallyexercisedorreserved,
tocontroltheworkoftheemployeeaswellasthemeansandmethodsbywhich
[4]
heaccomplishesthesame.

In this case, the school directress testified that Aquinas had an agreement
with a congregation of sisters under which, in order to fulfill its ministry, the
congregationwouldsendreligionteacherstoAquinastoprovidecatechesistoits
students. Aquinas insists that it was not the school but Yamyamins religious
congregation that chose her for the task of catechizing the schools grade three
students, much like the way bishops designate the catechists who would teach
religion in public schools. Under the circumstances, it was quite evident that
AquinasdidnothavecontroloverYamyaminsteachingmethods.TheIntonshad
not refuted the school directress testimony in this regard. Consequently, it was
errorfortheCAtoholdAquinassolidarilyliablewithYamyamin.

Ofcourse,Aquinasstillhadtheresponsibilityoftakingstepstoensurethat
only qualified outside catechists are allowed to teach its young students. In this
regard, it cannot be said that Aquinas took no steps to avoid the occurrence of
improperconducttowardsthestudentsbytheirreligionteacher.

First, Yamyamins transcript of records, certificates, and diplomas showed
thatshewasqualifiedtoteachreligion.

Second,thereisnoquestionthatAquinasascertainedthatYamyamincame
from a legitimate religious congregation of sisters and that, given her Christian
training,theschoolhadreasontoassumethatshewouldbehaveproperlytowards
thestudents.

Third, the school gave Yamyamin a copy of the schools Administrative
FacultyStaffManualthatsetthestandardsforhandlingstudents.Italsorequired
hertoattendateachingorientationbeforeshewasallowedtoteachbeginningthat
[5]
Juneof1998.

Fourth, the school preapproved the content of the course she was to
[6]
teach toensurethatshewasreallycatechizingthestudents.
Andfifth,theschoolhadaprogramforsubjectingYamyamintoclassroom
[7]
evaluation. Unfortunately, since she was new and it was just the start of the
schoolyear,Aquinasdidnothavesufficientopportunitytoobservehermethods.
At any rate, it acted promptly to relieve her of her assignment as soon as the
[8]
school learned of the incident. It cannot be said that Aquinas was guilty of
outrightneglect.

RegardingtheIntonspleaforanawardofgreateramountsofdamages,the
Courtfindsnojustificationforthissincetheydidnotappealfromthedecisionof
theCA.TheIntonsprayedfortheincreaseonlyintheircommenttothepetition.
They thus cannot obtain from this Court any affirmative relief other than those
[9]
thattheCAalreadygrantedtheminitsdecision.

WHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition, SETS ASIDE the
decisionoftheCourtofAppealsinCAG.R.CV88106datedAugust4,2008,and
HOLDSpetitionerAquinasSchoolnotliableindamagestorespondentJoseLuis
Inton.

SOORDERED.


ROBERTOA.ABAD
AssociateJustice

WECONCUR:

ANTONIOT.CARPIO
AssociateJustice


ANTONIOEDUARDOB.NACHURADIOSDADOM.PERALTA
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice

JOSECATRALMENDOZA
AssociateJustice

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in
consultationbeforethecasewasassignedtothewriteroftheopinionoftheCourts
Division.

ANTONIOT.CARPIO
AssociateJustice
Chairperson,SecondDivision


CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division
ChairpersonsAttestation,IcertifythattheconclusionsintheaboveDecisionhad
been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the
opinionoftheCourtsDivision.

RENATOC.CORONA
ChiefJustice

[1]
InitsDecisiondatedJune5,2006.
[2]
DocketedasCAG.R.CV88106.
[3]
In its Decision dated August 4, 2008, penned by Associate Justice Vicente S.E. Veloso and concurred in by
AssociateJusticesRebeccadeGuiaSalvadorandRicardoR.Rosario.
[4]
SocialSecurityCommissionv.Alba,G.R.No.165482,July23,2008,559SCRA477,488.
[5]
TSN,October4,2005,p.9.
[6]
Id.at4849.
[7]
Rollo,p.18.
[8]
TSN,October4,2005,pp.12and50.
[9]
UniversalStaffingServices,Inc.v.NationalLaborRelationsCommission,G.R.No.177576,July21,2008,559
SCRA221,231.