NOMINAL

DAMAGES

(Article 2221, 2222 & 2223, Civil Code)

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 recognized, and not for the
purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered
by him.

ARTICLE 2221, Civil Code

The court may award nominal damages in every obligation

arising from any sources enumerated in Art. 1157, or in
every case where any property right has been invaded.

ARTICLE 2222, Civil Code

 Obligations arises from:

Law,
Contracts,
Quasi-contracts,
Acts or omission punished by law, and
Quasi- delicts (ARTICLE 1157, Civil Code)

The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further

contest upon the right involved and all accessory questions,
as between the parties to the suit, or their respective heirs
and assigns.

ARTICLE 2223, Civil Code

Nominal Damages are not to be treated as an equivalent of a

wrong inflicted but SIMPLY A RECOGNITION OF THE
EXISTENCE OF AN INJURY.

PNOC Shipping and Transport Corp, vs. CA, et al.

G.R. No. 107518, October 8, 1998

Nominal Damages are recoverable where some injury has

been done but the amount of which the evidence fails to
show, the assessment of damages being left to the discretion
of the court according to the circumstances of the case.

Saludo, Jr., et al. vs. CA, et al.

G.R. No. 95536, March 23, 1992

In the ABSENCE OF COMPETENT PROOF ON

ACTUAL DAMGE SUFFERED, private respondent is
entitled to nominal damages.

Lufthansa German Airlines vs. CA, et al.

G.R. No. 108997, April 21, 1995

It is an established rule that nominal damages CANNOT

CO-EXIST WITH COMPENSATORY DAMAGES. This is
because two stands on totally different jural foundations.
Nominal Damages

-awarded not to indemnify

one for his loses but to
recognize a right that has
been violated

Compensatory Damages

-awarded for the precise

purpose of reparation and
indemnification

If no right has been violated or invaded, or no damages

have actually occurred, no nominal damages can be
awarded and the doctrine of nominal damages is not
applicable.

Solid Homes, Inc. vs. CA, et al.

G.R. No. 117501, July 8, 1997

IN FIXING THE AMOUNT OF NOMINAL DAMAGES

TO BE AWARDED, THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH
CASE SHOULD THUS BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
In a labor case, for example, the following should be taken
into account:
a. Length of service of the dismissed employee;
b. His salary or compensation at the time of the termination
vis--vis the capability of the employer to pay;
c. Question of whether the employer ha deliberately violated
for termination of employment or has attempted to
comply, at least substantially, therewith; and/or
d. Reasons for the termination of employment

If the dismissal is based on a just cause under Article 282 of the

Labor Code but the employer failed to comply with the notice
requirement, the sanction to be imposed upon him should be
tempered because the dismissal process was, in effect, initiated
by an act imputable to the employee.
If the dismissal is based on the authorized cause under Article
283 of the Labor Code but the employer failed to comply with
the notice requirement, the sanction to be imposed upon him
should be stiffer because the dismissal process was initiated by
the employers exercise of management prerogative.

The indemnity to be imposed should be stiffer to discourage the

abhorrent practice of dismiss now, pay later, which was sought
to be deterred in the Serrano ruling. The sanction should be in the
nature of indemnication or penalty and should dismiss the facts
of each case, taking into consideration the gravity of the due
process violation of the employer.
Nominal Damages is adjudicated in order that a right of the
plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant,
may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.

Agabon vs. NLRC, et al.

G.R. NO. 158693, November 12, 2004