SPOUSES RENATO S Dig
SPOUSES RENATO S Dig
1
evidence. A document or an article is valueless unless advanced any amount for medicine, hospitalization
it is formally offered in evidence, and the opposing and doctors fees, but on the contrary, petitioners have
counsel is given an opportunity to object to it and to testified that they paid for their expenses except at the
cross-examine any witness called to present or identify initial stage wherein a representative of respondent
it. Evidence not formally offered before the trial court Philtranco went to the hospital to get the receipts of
cannot be considered on appeal, for to consider them medicines only and paid. Considering the claim of the
at such stage will deny the other parties their right to petitioners, as alleged in their complaint they spent
rebut them. There is no agreement to submit the case P10,000.00 representing medical and miscellaneous
based on the pleading, as contended by the petitioners. expenses considering that they have gone for
The parties had no such intention, nor did said Order consultation to at least two (2) different doctors, this
evince such an agreement. Second Issue: Damages Court may take judicial notice of the fact that
Require Evidence Petitioners aver that there was grave miscellaneous expenses [are] bound to be incurred to
abuse of discretion when the amount of actual damages cover transportation and food, and therefore, finds the
awarded was reduced from P10,000 to P3,977, even if amount ofP10,000.00 as actual damages to be
the original amount did not even include the medical reasonable. Damages, after all, are not intended to
expenses that Francia continued to incur; and when the enrich the complainant at the expense of the defendant.
award of P48,000 as unrealized income was deleted Moral Damages and Diminution of Use of Francias
despite her testimony which was given credence by the Arm Petitioners protest the deletion of the amount of
trial court. The Court disagrees. Granting arguendo P50,000 earlier awarded by the trial court because of
that there was an agreement to submit the case for the diminution of the use of Francias right arm, arguing
decision based on the pleadings, this does not that she stated during direct examination that it could
necessarily imply that petitioners are entitled to the no longer perform its normal functions, and that
award of damages. The fundamental principle of the private respondents impliedly admitted this matter
law on damages is that one injured by a breach of when they failed to present controverting evidence. A
contract (in this case, the contract of transportation) or person is entitled to the physical integrity of his or her
by a wrongful or negligent act or omission shall have body, and if that integrity is violated, damages are due
a fair and just compensation, commensurate with the and assessable. However, physical injury, like loss or
loss sustained as a consequence of the defendants acts. diminution of use of an arm or a limb, is not a
Hence, actual pecuniary compensation is the general pecuniary loss. Indeed, it is not susceptible of exact
rule, except where the circumstances warrant the monetary estimation. Thus, the usual practice is to
allowance of other kinds of damages. Actual damages award moral damages for physical injuries sustained.
are such compensation or damages for an injury that In Mayo v. People, the Court held that the permanent
will put the injured party in the position in which he scar on the forehead and the loss of the use of the right
had been before he was injured. They pertain to such eye entitled the victim to moral damages. The victim,
injuries or losses that are actually sustained and in said case, was devastated by mental anguish,
susceptible of measurement. Except as provided by wounded feelings and shock, which she experienced as
law or by stipulation, a party is entitled to adequate a result of her false eye and the scar on her forehead.
compensation only for such pecuniary loss as he has Furthermore, the loss of vision in her right eye
duly proven. To be recoverable, actual damages must hampered her professionally for the rest of her life. In
be pleaded and proven in Court. In no instance may the the case at bar, it was sufficiently shown during the
trial judge award more than those so pleaded and trial that Francias right arm could not function in a
proven. Damages cannot be presumed. The award normal manner and that, as a result, she suffered
thereof must be based on the evidence presented, not mental anguish and anxiety. Thus, an increase in the
on the personal knowledge of the court; and certainly amount of moral damages awarded, from P30,000 to
not on flimsy, remote, speculative and nonsubstantial P50,000, appears to be reasonable and justified. Renato
proof. Article 2199 of the Civil Code expressly also suffered mental anxiety and anguish from the
mandates that except as provided by law or by accident. Thus, he should be separately awarded
stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate compensation P30,000 as moral damages. In some instances, the
only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has Court awards the cost of medical procedures to restore
duly proved. The lack of basis for such award was the injured person to his or her former condition.
patent in the trial court Decision: The records will However, this award necessitates expert testimony on
show that from the documentary evidence, petitioners the cost of possible restorative medical procedure. In
have jointly spent the sum of P3,977.00. Respondent, Gatchalian v. Delim, the Court, reasoning that a scar
Philtranco has not presented any evidence that it has resulting from the infliction of injury on the face of a
2
woman gave rise to a legitimate claim for restoration trouble involved; (3) the nature and importance of the
to her conditio ante, granted P15,000 as actual litigation or business in which the services were
damages for plastic surgery. It bears emphasis that the rendered; (4) the responsibility imposed; (5) the
said amount was based on expert testimony. In another amount of money or the value of the property affected
case, the Court granted actual or compensatory by the controversy or involved in the employment; (6)
damages in the sum of P18,000 for the surgical the skill and experience called for in the performance
intervention necessary to arrest the degeneration of the of the services; (7) the professional character and
mandible of a young boy. Again, there was an expert social standing of the attorney; (8) the results secured,
testimony that such medical procedure would cost it being a recognized rule that an attorney may properly
P3,000 and would have to be repeated several times to charge a much larger fee when it is contingent than
restore him to nearly normal condition. In the case at when it is not. Counsels performance, however, does
bar, petitioner failed to present evidence regarding the not justify the award of 25 percent attorneys fees. It is
feasibility or practicability and the cost of a restorative well-settled that such award is addressed to sound
medical operation on her arm. Thus, there is no basis judicial discretion and subject to judicial control. We
to grant her P48,000 for such expense. Unrealized do not see any abuse thereof in the case at bar. In fact,
Income Protesting the deletion of the award for the appellate court had been generous to petitioners
Francias unrealized income, petitioners contend that counsel, considering that the nature of the case was not
Francias injuries and her oral testimony adequately exceptionally difficult, and he was not required to exert
support their claim. The Court disagrees. Although Herculean efforts. All told, his handling of the case was
actual damages include indemnification for profits sorely inadequate, as shown by his failure to follow
which the injured party failed to obtain (lucro cesante elementary norms of civil procedure and evidence.
or lucrum cesans), the rule requires that said person WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision is AFFIRMED
produce the best evidence of which his case is with the MODIFICATION that Renato and Francia
susceptible. The bare and unsubstantiated assertion of Ong are separately awarded moral damages in the
Francia that she usually earned P200 a day from her amount of P30,000 and P50,000, respectively. The ten
market stall is not the best evidence to prove her claim percent (10%) attorneys fees shall be based on the total
of unrealized income for the eight-month period that modified award.
her arm was in plaster cast. Her testimony that it was People vs Degoma
their lessor who filed their income tax returns and 7. CIVIL LAW; DAMAGES; ACTUAL DAMAGES; MUST
obtained business licenses for them does not justify her BE PROVED BY COMPETENT EVIDENCE. In delict, the
failure to present more credible evidence of her defendant is liable for all damages which are the natural and
income. Furthermore, after her ten-day confinement at probable consequences of the act or omission complained of.
the San Pablo Hospital, she could have returned to her To seek recovery for actual damages, it is necessary to prove
work at the public market despite the plaster cast on with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon
her right arm, since she claimed to have two nieces as competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable by the
injured party, the actual amount of loss. Courts cannot simply
helpers. Clearly, the appellate court was correct in
assume that damages were sustained by the injured party, nor
deleting the award for unrealized income, because of
can it rely on speculation or guesswork in determining the fact
petitioners utter failure to substantiate her claim. and amount of damages.
Attorneys Fees Counsel for petitioner deeply laments
the reduction in the award of attorneys fees. He alleges 8. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. The court a quos
that he had to use his own money for transportation, award of actual damages in the amount of P87,947.94 is not
stenographic transcriptions and other court expenses, sustained by a review of the evidence of record. Of the
and for such reason, avers that the award of 25 percent expenses allegedly incurred, the Court can only give credence
attorneys fees made by the trial court was proper. to those supported by a receipt and which appear to have been
Under the Civil Code, an award of attorneys fees is an genuinely incurred in connection with the death, wake or burial
indemnity for damages ordered by a court to be paid of the victim. Thus, the Court cannot take account of receipts
by the losing party to the prevailing party, based on any showing expenses incurred before the date of the slaying of the
of the cases authorized by law. It is payable not to the victim; those incurred after a considerable lapse of time from
lawyer but to the client, unless the two the burial of the victim and which do not have any relation to
have agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer the death, wake or burial of the victim; those incurred for
purely aesthetic or social purposes, such as the lining with
as additional compensation or as part thereof. The
marble of the tomb of the victim; those which appear to have
Court has established a set of standards in fixing the
been modified to show an increase in the amount of
amount of attorneys fees: (1) [T]he amount and expenditure, such as by adding a number to increase the
character of the services rendered; (2) labor, time and
3
purchase value from tens to hundreds; those expenditures for death of the victim Pedrito Cudiamat; The sum
which could not be reasonably itemized or determined to have of Twenty Thousand (P20,000.00) by way of moral
been incurred in connection with the death, wake or burial of
the victim; those which would nonetheless have been incurred
damages; The sum of Two Hundred Eighty Eight
despite the death, wake or burial of the victim, the death, wake Thousand (P288,000.00) Pesos as actual and
or burial being merely incidental; and those which were not in compensatory damages; The costs of this suit.
fact shouldered by the immediate heirs of the victim, such as Petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied
plane trips by relatives or in-laws. Having these as guidelines, by the CA.
the Court puts the gross expenses proved by the immediate
heirs of the victim at P10,175.85. ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners are negligent and
liable for the damages claimed.
DANGWA TRANSPORTATION CO. INC. V RULING: It cannot be said that the deceased in
CA negligence. It is the duty of common carriers of
FACTS: This is a complaint for damages against passengers, including common carriers by railroad
petitioners for the death of Pedrito Cudiamat as a train, streetcar, or motorbus, to stop their
result of a vehicular accident. While petitioner conveyances a reasonable length of time in order to
Theodore M. Lardizabal was driving a passenger bus afford passengers an opportunity to board and enter,
belonging to petitioner corporation in a reckless and and they are liable for injuries suffered by boarding
imprudent manner and without due regard to traffic passengers resulting from the sudden starting up or
rules and regulations and safety to persons and jerking of their conveyances while they are doing so.
property, it ran over its passenger, Pedrito Cudiamat. Further, even assuming that the bus was moving, the
However, instead of bringing Pedrito immediately to act of the victim in boarding the same cannot be
the nearest hospital, the said driver, in utter bad faith considered negligent under the circumstances. As
and without regard to the welfare of the victim, first clearly explained in the testimony of the aforestated
brought his other passengers and cargo to their witness for petitioners, Virginia Abalos, th bus had
respective destinations before banging said victim to "just started" and "was still in slow motion" at the
the Lepanto Hospital where he died. Petitioners point where the victim had boarded and was on its
alleged that they had observed and continued to platform. It is not negligence per se, or as a matter of
observe the extraordinary diligence required in the law, for one attempt to board a train or streetcar
operation of the transportation company and the which is moving slowly. An ordinarily prudent
supervision of the employees, even as they add that person would have made the attempt board the
they are not absolute insurers of the safety of the moving conveyance under the same or similar
public at large. Further, it was alleged that it was the circumstances. The fact that passengers board and
victim's own carelessness and negligence which alight from slowly moving vehicle is a matter of
gave rise to the subject incident. common experience both the driver and conductor in
this case could not have been unaware of such an
Trial court rendered decision: IN VIEW OF ALL ordinary practice. The victim herein, by stepping and
THE FOREGOING, judgment is hereby pronounced standing on the platform of the bus, is already
that Pedrito Cudiamat was negligent, which considered a passenger and is entitled all the rights
negligence was the proximate cause of his death. and protection pertaining to such a contractual
Nonetheless, defendants in equity, are hereby relation. Hence, it has been held that the duty which
ordered to pay the the carrier passengers owes to its patrons extends to
heirs of Pedrito Cudiamat the sum of P10,000.00 persons boarding cars as well as to those alighting
which approximates the amount defendants initially therefrom. Common carriers, from the nature of their
offered said heirs for the amicable settlement of the business and reasons of public policy, are bound to
case. No costs. CA set aside the decision of the trial observe extraordinary diligence for the safety of the
court and rendered judgment: The sum of Thirty passengers transported by the according to all the
Thousand (P30,000.00) Pesos by way of indemnity circumstances of each case. A common carrier is
bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human
4
care and foresight can provide, using the utmost not sufficiently identified to be the subject of the published
diligence very cautious persons, with a due regard articles.
ISSUE: WoN there are sufficient grounds to constitute guilt
for all the circumstances. of petitioners for libel.
RULING: In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that
It has also been repeatedly held that in an action
the victim be identifiable although it is not necessary that he
based on a contract of carriage, the court need not be named. It is also not sufficient that the offended party
make an express finding of fault or negligence on the recognized himself as the person attacked or defamed, but it
part of the carrier in order to hold it responsible to must be shown that at least a third person could identify him
pay the damages sought by the passenger. By as the object of the libelous publication. These requisites
have not been complied with in the case at bar. The element
contract of carriage, the carrier assumes the express of identifiability was not met since it was Wenceslaso who
obligation to transport the passenger to his revealed he was the organizer of said conference and had he
destination safely and observe extraordinary not done so the public would not have known. The concept
diligence with a due regard for all the circumstances, of privileged communications is implicit in the freedom of
the press and that privileged communications must be
and any injury that might be suffered by the protective of public opinion. Fair commentaries on matters
passenger is right away attributable to the fault or of public interest are privileged and constitute a valid
negligence of the carrier. This is an exception to the defense in an action for libel or slander. The doctrine of fair
general comment means that while in general every discreditable
imputation publicly made is deemed false, because every
rule that negligence must be proved, and it is man is presumed innocent until his guilt is judicially proved,
therefore incumbent upon the carrier to prove that it and every false imputation is deemed malicious,
nevertheless, when the discreditable imputation is directed
has exercised extraordinary diligence as prescribed against a public person in his public capacity, it is not
in Articles 1733 and 1755 of the Civil Code. With necessarily actionable. In order that such discreditable
respect to the award of damages, an oversight was, imputation to a public official may be actionable, it must
however, committed by respondent Court of either be a false allegation of fact or a comment based on a
false supposition. If the comment is an expression of
Appeals in computing the actual damages based on opinion, based on established facts, then it is immaterial that
the gross income of the victim. The rule is that the the opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it might
amount recoverable by the heirs of a victim of a tort reasonably be inferred from the facts. The questioned article
is not the loss of the entire earnings, but rather the dealt with matters of public interest as the declared objective
of the conference, the composition of its members and
loss of that portion of the earnings which the participants, and the manner by which it was intended to be
beneficiary would have received. In other words, funded no doubt lend to its activities as being genuinely
only net earnings, not gross earnings, are to be imbued with public interest. Respondent is also deemed to
considered, that is, the total of the earnings less be a public figure and even otherwise is involved in a public
issue. The court held that freedom of expression is
expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings
constitutionally guaranteed and protected with the reminder
or income and minus living and other incidental among media members to practice highest ethical standards
expenses. in the exercise thereof. A privileged communication may be
either:
1. Absolutely privileged communication are those
BORJAL VS CA FACTS: A civil action for damages which are not actionable even if the author has acted in
based on libel was filed before the court against Borjal and bad faith. An example is found in Sec. 11, Art.VI, of
Soliven for writing and publishing articles that are allegedly the 1987
derogatory and offensive against Francisco Wenceslao, Constitution which exempts a member of Congress
attacking among others the solicitation letters he send to from liability for any speech or debate in the Congress
support a conference to be launch concerning resolving or in any Committee thereof. 2. Qualifiedly privileged
matters on transportation crisis that is tainted with communications are those containing defamatory
anomalous activities. Wenceslao however was never named
in any of the articles nor was the conference he was imputations are not actionable unless found to have
organizing. The lower court ordered petitioners to been made without good intention justifiable motive.
indemnify the private respondent for damages which was To this genre belong "private communications" and
affirmed by the Court of Appeals. A petition for review was "fair and true report without any comments or
filed before the SC contending that private respondent was remarks."