Torts and Crimes

TORTS
It is a legal wrong committed upon another’s person or property independent of a

contract.
Art. 2176 of the NCC states that “Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another,
there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done.”
Art. 20 of the NCC provides “Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently
causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same.”
LEX LOCI DELICTI COMMISSII

Law of the place where the wrong was committed
Reasons for the Lex Loci Delicti Commissi Rule:
1. The state where the social disturbance occurred has the primary duty to redress the wrong, and
to determine the effects of the injury;
2. The law of said state must be presumed to have been foremost in the mind of the parties
concerned; thus they acted with knowledge of the resultant consequences under said law
Characterization of the Locus Delicti
1. Civil Law Theory

▪ the locus delicti is where the wrongful act began or occurred. This is because
rules on tort are intended to regulate human conduct; hence, a person who willfully or
negligently acts contrary to social norms must be held liable for any injury caused.
2. Common Law Theory

▪ The locus delicti is where the tortious act first became effective. This is due to
the fact that until there is produced some effect, some result, no injury or wrong has really been
committed, despite the disregard of human norms. The law on torts seeks to give protection and
redress; without injury, there is no necessity for judicial relief and intervention.
3. Rabel’s Theory
▪ The locus delicti is the place which has the most substantial or essential
connection with the act.
Modern Theories in Tort Liability
Doctrine of Elective Concurrence

In this theory, it is held that both the state where the actor engaged in his conduct and the
place of injury has jurisdiction over the case as it can be said that the said tort was committed in
both places.
State of the Most Significant Relationship

The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to the particular issue, has the most
significant relationship to the occurrence and the parties.
Factors to be considered:
a) the place where the injury occurred;
b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred;
c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business of the parties;
and
d) the place where the relationship, or any, between the parties centered.
State-Interest Analysis
All relevant and governmental concerns of a state in an issue, not only as a sovereign in a
set of facts or an entity but as a repository of justice, must be considered by a court of law in
determining which law to apply.
Carver’s Principle of Preference

When a State has no statutory provision as to the law that should regulate the question of
tort liability in conflicts cases, its courts should be guided by certain rules in determining which
of the conflicting rules should apply to an alleged tort.
FOUR Suggested Principles:
(1) Where the liability of the State of injury set a higher standard of conduct or of financial
protection against injury than do the laws of the State where the person causing the injury has
acted or has his home, the laws of the State of injury should determine the standard and the
protection applicable to the case.
(2) Where the liability laws of the state in which the defendant acted and caused the injury set a
lower standard of conduct or of financial protection than do the laws of the home State of the
person suffering the injury, the laws of the State of conduct and injury should determine the
standard of conduct or protection applicable to the case.
(3) Where the State in which a defendant has acted has established special controls, including the
sanction of civil liability, over conduct of the kind in which the defendant was engaged when he
caused a foreseeable injury to the plaintiff in another state, the plaintiff, though having no
relationship to the defendant, should be accorded the benefit of the special standard of conduct
and of financial protection in the State of the defendant’s conduct, even though the State of
injury had imposed no such controls or sanction.
(4) Where the law of the State in which a relationship has its seat has imposed a standard of
conduct or of financial protection on one party to that relationship for the benefit of the other
party which is higher than the like standard imposed by the State of injury, the law of the former
State should determine the standard of conduct or financial protection applicable to the case for
the benefit of the party protected by the State’s law.
Special Rules
1. If the tort is committed aboard a public vessel, whether on the high seas or in foreign territorial
waters, the country to which the vessel belongs is the locus delicti; the law of the flag is thus the
lex loci delicti commissi.
2. If the tort takes place aboard a private or merchant vessel on the high seas, the law of the flag
is likewise the lex loci delicti commissi.
3. If the tort concerns property, whether real or personal, the lex situs is usually also the lex loci
delicti commissi.
4. Maritime torts
(a) If the colliding vessels are of the same state, or carry the same flag, said law is the lex
loci delicti commissi.
(b) If the vessels come from different states, whose laws however, on the matter are
identical, said laws constitute the lex loci delicti commissi.
(c) If the vessels come from different states with different laws, the lex loci delicti
commissi is the general maritime law as understood and applied by the forum where the case is
tried.
TORT Problems
Fraud or Misrepresentation
Conflicts of law issue:

When the defendant’s fraud or misrepresentation and the defendant’s reliance occur in the
same state, no problem arises, but if they do not, what will be the choice of law principle that
will govern?
Proposed choice of law:

In cases of fraud or misrepresentation, the principal concern is the protection of the
plaintiff and this will therefore normally lead to the place where he acted in reliance.
Defamation and Invasion of Privacy

If the publication of the libel or slander or the invasion of privacy occurs in different
states.
The majority of the States adopted the “Single Publication Rule” whereby plaintiff may
only bring one suit for the particular publication. The law more favorable to the plaintiff which is
usually the law of his domicile, following the “Most Significant Relationship” Principle.
Products Liability

Products liability suits are a hybrid of tort and contract claims, usually involving claims
of negligence and strict liability or breach of warranty. Mass torts, which may or may not include
product liability, involve injury to many victims as a result of a single act (explosion) or of
continuous acts (toxic or polluting emissions).

The Second Restatement applies its “Most significant Relationship” test to products
liability, which allows the court to take account of the “legal, social, and economic consequences
of the total contract-tort situation.”
The Hague Convention on the law applicable to Products Liability takes a similar
approach. Article 4 of the Convention provides that the applicable law shall be the internal
law of the State of the place of the injury, if that State is also:
a) the place of the habitual residence of the person directly suffering damage
b) the principal place of business of the person claimed to be liable
c) the place where the product was acquired by the person directly suffering damage.
Article 5 of the Convention goes on to provide that the applicable law shall be the law of
the State of the habitual residence of the injured person, if the State is also the principal place of
business or the place where the product is acquired. In essence therefore, the plaintiff has the
option to choose between the law of his habitual residence or the law of the principal place of
business of the defendant in case the two coincide.
Statutory Liability
Conflicts of law issue: Choice-of-law problems also exist when statutes provide for no-fault
liability.
Choice-of-law problems may arise in a variety of situations:
a) when tort-state parties are injured in a no-fault state and a no-fault liability is imposed
on the tort-state driver;
b) when the cars each occupied by the parties from both types of States
collide;
c) when different no-fault statutes are in issue.
Proposed choice-of-law:
1.Territorial Legislation: provides benefits for every person injured in the state regardless
of the domicile.
2. Domiciliary Legislation: Awards no-fault benefits on the basis of the victim’s in-state
residence.
Enforceability of Foreign Torts in the Philippines
Requisites:
1) Our courts have jurisdiction over the case;

2) The foreign tort must not be penal in character;
3) The enforcement of tortious liability will not contravene our public policy; and
4) Our judicial machinery must be adequate for such enforcement.
Application by Philippine Courts of the Proper Lex Loci Delicti Commissi
Philippine law will be used to govern, among other things, must consider the following
points:
1. The proper prescriptive period;

2. The proper parties;
3. Whether or not the act is considered the proximate cause of the injury;
4. The measure of damages, except punitive ones;
5. The burden of proof and the defenses that may be interposed.
Enforcement of Claim for Foreign Tort

As a general rule an action for tort may be brought in any place where the defendant may
be served with process or is subject to suit.
In Anglo-American law, there is one tort action that is considered local so that recovery is
not allowed outside the State where the wrong occurred, this constitutes an exception of the rule.
CRIMES
It is an act or omission punishable by law.
Theories as to What Court has Jurisdiction
Territorial Theory
▪ it is where the crime was committed
Nationality or Personal Theory

▪ country of which the criminal is a citizen or a subject
Protective Theory
▪ any state whose national interest may be jeopardized has jurisdiction so that it
may protect itself.
Real Theory
▪ any state whose penal code has been violated has jurisdiction, whether the
crime was committed outside or outside its territory
Cosmopolitan or Universality Theory

▪ the state where the criminal is found or which has his custody has jurisdiction
Passive Personality Theory

▪ the state of which the victim is a citizen or subject has jurisdiction
The Locus Delicti of certain Crimes and their Point of Contact
Frustrated and consummated homicide, murder, infanticide, and parricide

Point of Contact: where the victim was injured.
Attempted homicide, murder, infanticide, and parricide

Point of Contact: where the intent victim was as weapon or the bullet either touched him or fell
inside the territory where he was
Bigamy
Point of Contact: where the illegal marriage was performed
Theft and Robbery

Point of Contact: where the property was unlawfully taken from the victim
Estafa or Swindling through false representations

Point of Contact: where the object of the crime was received
Conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion or sedition

Point of Contact: where the conspiracy was formed
Libel
Point of Contact: where published or circulated
Continuing offense
Point of Contact: any place where the offense begins, exists or continues
Complex crimes
Point of Contact: any place where any of the essential elements of the crime took place
-END-

Torts and Crimes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torts and Crimes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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 and Crimes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TORTS

It is a legal wrong committed upon another’s person or property independent of a

LEX LOCI DELICTI COMMISSII

Reasons for the Lex Loci Delicti Commissi Rule:

Characterization of the Locus Delicti

1. Civil Law Theory

2. Common Law Theory

Doctrine of Elective Concurrence

State of the Most Significant Relationship

Carver’s Principle of Preference

FOUR Suggested Principles:

Conflicts of law issue:

Proposed choice of law:

Defamation and Invasion of Privacy

Conflicts of law issue:

Conflicts of law issue:

Proposed choice of law:

1) Our courts have jurisdiction over the case;

Application by Philippine Courts of the Proper Lex Loci Delicti Commissi

1. The proper prescriptive period;

Enforcement of Claim for Foreign Tort

Theories as to What Court has Jurisdiction

Nationality or Personal Theory

Cosmopolitan or Universality Theory

Passive Personality Theory

The Locus Delicti of certain Crimes and their Point of Contact

Frustrated and consummated homicide, murder, infanticide, and parricide

Attempted homicide, murder, infanticide, and parricide

Theft and Robbery

Estafa or Swindling through false representations

Conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion or sedition

You might also like