Professional Documents
Culture Documents
6 LAguna
6 LAguna
DIZON, J.:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
943
ten (10) meters and foreseeing that he could not avoid being hit by
the truck which had swerved to the left, he applied his brakes and
maneuvered his bus towards the right side of the road so much so
that the right wheels were already on the shoulder of the road;
but that before he could come to a complete stop, at a speed then
of only 10 kilometers per hour, the left front mudguard of his bus
was hit by the 7-Up truck.”
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
(5) that a carrier shall not be responsible for events which could
not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable (Alfaro
vs. Ayson, 54 O.G. 7922).
“In the light of the foregoing principles and the evidence of
record, the main questions for determination are whether
defendant has successfully discharged its burden of disproving its
presumptive negligence because of its failure to transport safely
to his destination the deceased Ricardo C. Tiongson, and whether
defendant has sufficiently established its defense of fortuitous
event.
“After a review of the record, the court believes that defendant
has not successfully discharged its burden. Defendant’s driver,
Samonte, wanted to impress the court that he was entirely free
from fault or negligence in the collision between his bus and the
7-Up truck. This he testified that when he first sighted the 7-Up
truck, 150 meters away from his bus, the said truck was then
running between 50 and 60 kilometers per hour, while he, for his
part, was then going only at about 30 kilometers per hour. This
testimony of Samonte is to be seriously doubted. In the first place,
he and his conductor, Al cantara, must be necessarily biased
witnesses for they are both employed by the defendant. In the
second place, it is of common knowledge that a delivery truck fully
loaded with
944
hour, and brought his bus towards the right side of the road; and
that it was only when the distance between the two vehicles was
only about 10 meters that he first stepped on the brakes. The
court feels that it was not enough for Samonte to slacken his
speed gradually until he came down to 10 kilometers per hour. He
should have stopped his bus immediately upon seeing the 7-Up
truck veer towards his lane after jumping out of the big
depression on the asphalted pavement. He was not unaware of
such depression, and the location thereof for he had been
travelling on the same route for a considerable length of time
prior to 3 June 1958.
“It will not do for defendant’s driver to claim that he could not
avoid the 7-Up truck because if he did he would have fallen into
the ditch on his side of the highway. If he was placed in the
position claimed by him, it was entirely his fault, for he could
have easily avoided the 7-Up truck if he had applied his brakes on
time, while the 7-Up truck was still more than 10 meters away
from him. Besides, instead of applying the brakes while the 7-Up
truck was still some distance away from him, he could have
veered to the left side of the road, going north, where there was
sufficient space for him, taking into account that the asphalted
pavement of the road was 5-1/2 meters wide with a shoulder of 65
cm. wide. In such posture, he could have avoided collision with
the 7-Up truck which, on the other hand, would have also been
free to right its direction after it came out from the big depression.
“An examination of the sketch prepared by the chief of police of
Bay, Laguna (Exhibit 1) shows that the collision between
defendant’s bus and the 7-Up truck occurred only 8
945
meters away from the big depression. This short distance would
seem to indicate that defendant’s driver, Samonte, knowing
exactly the location of the depression, and anticipating that the 7-
Up truck coming the opposite direction would veer to the left of
the said depression in order to avoid the same, raced with the 7-
Up truck in order that he could first pass through the space
between the depression and what was left of the asphalted
pavement of the lane on which he was then travelling, obviously
for the purpose of avoiding delay. Because of this, the 7-Up truck
driver who must have intended to pass on the said space in order
to avoid going through the depression, was suddenly forced into
the depression, in order to avoid a head-on collision with
defendant’s bus. But unfortunately, after bumping out of the
depression, the truck veered to the left and hit defendant’s bus on
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
the left front side, thereby causing the bus to overturn on its right
side.”
947
Decision affirmed.
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/10
4/24/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000162f65c39ee3904c633003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/10