Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/169345939/Torts-Second-Half-Cases-1
Timestamp: 2017-05-23 01:39:59
Document Index: 97591421

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art 2195', 'Art 2176', 'Art 2202', 'Art 1414', 'Art 2201', 'Art 2201', 'Art 107', 'Art 104', 'Art 2195', 'art 2206', 'Art 2204', 'Art 1764', 'Art 2332', 'Art 2206', 'Art 2206', 'Art 2206', 'Art 2200', 'Art 2204', 'Art 2219', 'Art 1169', 'Art 1403', 'Art 1226', 'Art 1226', 'Art 1308', 'Art 1956', 'Art 1310', 'Art 1956', 'Art 1308', 'Art 1109', 'Art 2209', 'Art 2209', 'Art 2209', 'Art 1152', 'Art 2212', 'Art 1959', 'Art 1959', 'Art 2209', 'Art 2213', 'Art 1256', 'Art 1306', 'Art 2209', 'Art 2216', 'Art 2221', 'Art 2224', 'Art 2217', 'Art 2217', 'Art 2221', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art1']

Torts Second+Half+Cases (1) | Liquidated Damages | Damages
ScribdExploreEXPLORE BY INTERESTSCareer & MoneyBusiness Biography & HistoryEntrepreneurshipLeadership & MentoringMoney ManagementTime ManagementPersonal GrowthHappinessPsychologyRelationships & ParentingReligion & SpiritualitySelf-ImprovementPolitics & Current AffairsPoliticsSocietyScience & TechScienceTechHealth & FitnessFitnessNutritionSportsWellnessLifestyleArts & LanguagesFashion & BeautyFood & WineHome & GardenTravelEntertainmentCelebrity Biography & MemoirPop CultureBiographies & HistoryBiography & MemoirHistoryFictionChildren’s & YAClassic LiteratureContemporary FictionHistorical FictionLGBTQ FictionMystery, Thriller & CrimeRomanceScience Fiction & FantasyBROWSE BY CONTENT TYPEBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicUploadSign inJoinOptionsJoinSign InUploadTorts Second+Half+Cases (1)Uploaded by Karla BernardoLiquidated DamagesDamagesPunitive DamagesNegligenceInterest0.0 (0)DownloadEmbedDescription: tortsView MoretortsCopyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)List price: $0.00Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentTorts and DamagesSession 10 – Art 2195-2206, 2214-2215, Cases 72, 163-180 NPC v CA – Abdullah owns fishpond at the foot of Lanao Lake. Agus Dam was subsequently constructed wherein water overflowed for failure of EEs in Agus Dam to release water during rainy season. Thus, fishpond was damaged. Art 2176. Art 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all damages, which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen by the defendant. Farolan v Solmac Mktg Comp – Farolan (acting commissioner of customs) and Parayno (acting chief of Customs Intelligence) has not released the shipment of OPP film waste/scrap for making fibers and films. Customs claim that the products is of higher class considered as polypropylene film which is restricted by LOI. BOI is in conflict in their opinion. Solmac sued Farolan and Parayno claims not releasing it is not done in good faith. RTC: damages in their private capacity. But Farolan not liable, first name is different, must be “Ramon” not “Damian.” GOOD FAITH refers to a state of the mind which is manifested by the acts of the individual concerned. It consists of the honest intention to abstain from taking an unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of another. Good faith is always presumed and it is upon who alleges the contrary that the burden of proof lies. Mistakes concededly committed by public officers are not actionable absent any clear showing that they were motivated by malice or gross negligence amounting to bad faith. Saba v CA – 1934: Pedro de la Cruz. 1949: lease public lot for 15 years. Upon death of Pedro, children sold their share to Emil Ong and Jose Ongchuan. 1966: share of Lourdes Agbayani was sold to Saba. Saba wrote to Emil and jose that all rentals shall be delivered to him but no avail. She sued them. Moral damages may be awarded to compensate one for diverse injuries such as mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings and social humiliation. It is not enough that injuries have arisen, it is essential that they have sprung from wrongful act or omission, fraud, malice or bad faith which was the proximate cause. The law could not impose a penalty on the right to litigate. One who exercises his rights does no injury. – damnum adsque injuria rule. Saba was in good faith in filing collection suit. A person may have erred but error alone is not a ground for moral damages. Whatever worries, anxieties and expenses respondents may have suffered were only such as are usually caused to a party haled into court as a defendant in a litigation. Hulst v PR Builders – Dutch spouse bought a residential lot but PR Builders has not developed lot. Spouse to rescind contract to sell and sue PR. In pari delicto. An exception to such rule where, even as the intent to circumvent the constitutional proscription on aliens owning real property was evident by virtue of the execution of the Contract to Sell, such violation of the law did not materialize because the buyer cased the rescission of the contract before the execution of the final deed transferring ownership. Under Art 1414, one who repudiates the agreement and demands his money before the illegal act has taken place is entitled to recover. Hulst is entitled to the recovery only of the amount of P3,187,500, representing purchase price paid to PR. No damages may be recovered on the bases of a void contract; being nonexistent, the agreement produces no juridical tie between the parties involved. Hulst is not entitled to actual, interest, moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees. Choa Tek Hee v Phil Publishing Co – Manila Times published an article “charge P193k was spent in administering P200k. Chinese of Cebu files complaint against wealthy Manila Merchant” taken from the file of clerk of court of CFI. Tek Hee, supposed to order hardware products from US but bad reputation because article. ACTUAL –actual pecuniary damages sustained and not damages for injury to his feelings and reputation. PECUNIARY damages – in tort where the injury is clearly proved, but not the exact amount of damages. The very nature of injuries on such could not be fully compensated by money damages. Pecuniary damages for LOSS of ANTICIPATED PROFITS must not be only capable of proof, but must be proved with a reasonable degree of certainty – both in nature and cause from which they proceed . No recovery can be had for loss of profits which are uncertain, contingent, conjectural, or speculative, it must be borne in mind that since profits are prospective they must be uncertain and problematic in some extent, and on that account or on account of difficulties in way of proof, a person complaining of breach of contract cannot be
1 thil lozada
deprived of all remedy.” Damages must be established by competent evidence the amount of such, courts cannot give judgment for a greater amount than those actually proven. Exception: ill will or express malice – punitive damages are allowed in discretion of court. The article was false, published with intent to injure the plaintiff’s feelings, and to degrade him in public estimation- implied malice. If the charge complained of is injurious and no justifiable motive for it is apparent, malice is inferred from the falsity of the charge. Mendoza v PAL – Mendoza, owner of theatre in Naga, rented a movie, “Himala ng Birhen” in time for Maskarra festival. It would be shown on Sept 18-19. LVN Pictures sent it thru PAL on Sept 17, it loaded to the plane but sent back to Manila. It was received by Mendoza only on Sept 20. Sued to recover 3k damages loss of profit. Art 2201 – damages only those foreseen at the time of perfection of contract. PAL could not foresee that Mendoza suffered damages in the delay in delivering the film – his plans to exhibit on fiesta were not called to PAL’s attention . Lasam v Smith – Smith owner of car garage, Lasam rented one with their licensed driver. Driver let his unlicensed assistant to drive, car fell on embankment. Conflict if reckless driving or defect on steering gear. Smith’s liability to Lasam was contractual, Smith is liable unless it is shown that the accident was due to a fortuitous event. Expenses incurred as a result of accident greatly exceeded the amount of damages awarded since damages resulting from negligence in the fulfilment of a contractual obligation, the courts have a “discretionary power to moderate the liability according to the circumstances.” Ilao-Oreta v Ronquillo – R check-in in hospital for laparoscopic operation to know the cause of her infertility. IO failed to arrive as scheduled – still on return filght form Hawaii. She forgot to consider time difference. No gross negligence. Common human knowledge that excitement attends the preparations for the honeymoon. Her negligence could then be partly attributed to human frailty which rules out its characterization as gross. The doctor’s negligence not being gross, the spouses are not entitled to recover moral damages. NO Exemplary damages – absent of wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. NOR attorney’s fees – not compelled to litigate and incur expenses to protect their interest The list of expenses cannot replace receipts when they should have been issued as a matter of course in business transactions, as in the case of purchase of gasoline and of food. Algarra v Sandejas – plaintiff – personal injuries – commission agent about 20 regular customers. Lost 4 customers. WON value of loss which she suffered can be extended to pain which she experienced by reason of accident. Reparation, to be efficacious and substantial, must rationally include generic idea of complete indemnity. Fraud is not an element. Only when there exists a natural and true relation between such nonfulfillment and the damages, whatever reason there may be to demand them on another account. FORESEEABILITY – if such result and the chain of events connecting it with the act complained of had occurred to his mind, the same would have seemed natural and probable and according to the ordinary course of nature. MEASURING damages – no distinction is made between damage caused maliciously and intentionally and damages caused through mere negligence in so far as the civil liability of the wrongdoer is concerned. Defendant to repair damage done – to put plaintiff in the same position. Exemplary or punitive damages – malicious or wilful intention to cause damages – aggravating circumstance. Nominal damages – only a technical violation of the plaintiff’s rights resulting in no substantial injury to him. Mere noncompliance with the obligations of a contract is not sufficient to sustain a judgment for damages. It must be shown that damages actually existed. A release or compromise for personal injury sustained by negligence attributed to the defendant company was held a bar to an action for the recovery of further damages. Performance not proven to be destructive or injurious and generally acquiesced in by society for so long a time as to have ripened into a custom, cannot be held to be unreasonable or imprudent. The measure of damages is an ultimate fact, to be determined from the evidence submitted to the court.
2 thil lozada
through misleading representation and failure to carry out the contract. Actual damages – income that C could have earned if he should finish the medical course and pass the corresponding board exams must be deemed to be within the same category because they could have reasonably foreseen by the parties at the time he boarded. its stands to reason that he should be indemnified the reasonable value of the thing. But ER offered to come back but he denied demanding higher wage Action based on a wrongful discharge is one to recover damages for breach of contract. Lemoine v Alkan – mechanic illegally dismissed – claims incompetent and insubordinate. but must depend on actual proof that damages had been suffered and on evidence of actual amount. filing case. had he sold it. Indemnification for damages comprehends not only the value of the loss suffered. and any other damages which might have been sustained and which plaintiff could prove. bumped with other private car. through no fault of his. courts cannot rely on “speculation.Torts and Damages
Profits are not excluded from recovery because they are profits. actual expenses incurred in shuttling back and forth between places to confer with lawyer. when he wrongfully
3 thil lozada
. No damages of any kind – unforeseen event or fault of boy or his parents Angeles v Lerma – Lacson v Quisumbing – L arrived at airport to attend business & hired Dollar Taxi as carrier. TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES – in motor vehicle mishaps resulting in injury of passenger. at the time. but also the profits which the obligee failed to obtain. injured when bus which he is in crossed train tracks and bumped engine of the train. If one cannot obtain the thing agreed upon. But Traya claims truck was fully loaded and running low speed. The damages in an action for wrongful discharge are prima facie the amount of wages for the full term. are the natural and probable consequences of carrier’s breach of obligation – Art 2201 CC. Lucro cessante – price which the thing could have commanded on the date that the obligation should have been fulfilled and was not –difference in the price from date of acquisition to the presentation of complaint. and the findings of juries should be based. No Exemplary damages. Sued Tin. Helpless condition – physically and mentally. is no reason for denying claim. as long as it does not involve a renunciation of any right already accrued. and it does not permit him to remain idle and collect his wages nevertheless when he has an opportunity to return to his former employment. -guilty of breach of contract but only liable for actual damages not moral damages. No moral damages because plaintiff spouse not the party to the contract of carriage nor can invoke quasi-delict since they were not themselves injured as a result of the collision between the bus and train. Unconscious for 35 days. but through the fault of the obligor. it is on the ground that there are no criteria by which to estimate the amount with the certainty on which the adjudications of courts. Puentebella v Negros Coal Co – A person injured by breach of contract cannot recover damages for any loss which he might have avoided with ordinary care and at reasonable expense. absent w/o permission. ER. Where plaintiffs had entered into a contract with a corporation which was subsequently dissolved and whose liabilities had been assumed by another person who. Actual damages must be proved. Mere fact that loss cannot be ascertained with absolute accuracy. Raagas v Traya – Raagas’ 3 year old son was ran over by a truck. L suffered injury. It was owned by Q. Mere acceptance of the offer of defendant would not constitute a waiver of his right to recover damages for the time intervening from the date of the wrongful discharge to the time when he returned to work under the new offer which would consist in the loss of wages for that period. but when excluded. RATIO: to require an EE to labor if he is given the opportunity. caused losses to plaintiff – he must share the damage.defendant is mere owner and operator of common carrier and does not participate in or ratify the negligent act of his driver Associated Realty Dev’t Co v CA – Tin purchased lot 54 and estero lot – constructed house – 72 sqm but found that estero lot is government property. and attending trials. Cariaga v Laguna Tayabas Bus Co – C 4th year medical student. EE should have accepted the offer even under old contract. conjecture or guesswork” as to the fact and amount of damages.
Alcantara v Surro & Meralco (1953)– A died while attempting to board a bus of Meralco when it was hit by another bus of same company. The life expectancy of deceased or beneficiary. X actual/compensatory damages. moral damages. Medical and funeral expenses
4 thil lozada
. Only daughter sued. the award of actual damages is erroneous. civil service eligible. VP of family corp Factors considered in fixing award 1.Art 107: indemnification of consequential damages caused to: injured party and those suffered by family or third person by reason of the crime No exact rule for measuring human life – amount depends on facts and circumstances of each case. conjecture or guesswork. No damages against company – DC did nothing tending to prevent said damages or at least to minimize them. subsidiary. applied a vacant position in Clark Air Base as a guidance counsellor. Cases 181-200 Shauf v CA – Shauf is a Filipina. Loss of service 4. In actual damages. Borromeo v MERALCO – B about to ride electric car after letting his 2 children ride. Shauf never acquired any vested right to the salaries pertaining to the position as guidance counsellor since she was never appointed to such. 2214-2215. 2 kinds of damages: damages for the loss actually sustained and for the profit which the injured party may have failed to realize.Torts and Damages
discharges an EE. and insurance proceeds paid to heir of victim by insurance credited in favor of erring driver. whichever is shorter. married to a US Air Force. She Masters in UST. Award of pension to deceased accident victim which was lost by his death – sure income that was cut short by defendant. Damages which are merely possible are speculative . Earning capacity of deceased 5. He was a 45-year old chief marine engr with a salary of 375. Loss of support 3. Doctoral degree in behavoir and counselling psychology. Mental suffering of beneficiaries 6. Shauf sued them for discrimination and unequal employment opportunities. Civil liability of bus owner for death caused by his driver. Age and life expectancy of deceased 3. to furnish various firms and persons with firewood. Other factors: 1. he fell off. (other cases includes patrimonial and moral damages – physical condition and social standing of injured persons) RPC – controlling when civil liability arising from crimes . becomes. dragged and rear wheels passed over his left foot. when he could have done so by appealing to the officers of the company for relief. His incapacity to continue in the practice of his profession has put an end to one of his activities and has certainly destroyed the principal source of his professional earning in the future.Art 104: restitution. worked for 4 years as guidance counsellor in Clark Air Base. Company conceded him all the facilities in order that he might comply with his obligations. Award of pension of 1 year. a debtor in bad faith. Despite such qualifications. the court cannot rely on speculation. reparation of damages. Loss of society 5. indemnification of consequential damages . his application was refused and instead hired an American living in Maine. Pain and suffering of deceased and plaintiffs 7. Tender age of children – 5-13 years old 2. De Castelvi v Cia General de Tabacos – DC was permitted to cut woods in hacienda but when Got became the Manager again. Pecuniary situation of party liable – not less than 6k – standard amount of award to heirs of deceased arising from criminal offenses. It was amputated. with respect to the EE. State of health at the time of death 4. Pecuniary loss to plaintiff or beneficiary 2. prevent him from taking cut wood and piled in different places on the hacienda. Actual pecuniary damages 6. Without the actual proof of loss. Session 11 – Art 2195-2206. De Caliston v CA – driver of a bus ran over D a USVA pensioner who died. He was awarded costs of expenses incurred but not for the amputation of his left foot. entered into during the time said concession was in force.
When plaintiffs prayed in their complaint for such other relief and remedies that may be availed of under the premises. E enraged. passenger in bus.Awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means.000 ACTUAL damages – must be competent proof of the actual amount of loss. Annual net income of 1.# of years victim would have lived 2. But they cannot be recovered as a matter of right. and if introduced they are not conclusive. 2. E & D stabbed S while B prevent him from escaping.
5 thil lozada
.500 damages & 500 for treatment. including death Actual damages – P43. . fell in stone embankment – injuries left her permanently disfigured. R. X factor in determining indemnity Junio & Solaria v Manila Railroad (58 phil 176) – J & S passengers of a car that hit the train while the car was crossing the railroad. Testimonial evidence suffices to establish a basis for which the court can make a fair and reasonable estimate of the loss earning capacity. Compensatory damages – 40k – 100/month as Asst Supervisor. diversions. Rate of loss sustained by heirs of the deceased NET EARNING CAPACITY = =LIFE EXPECTANCY x [GROSS ANNUAL INCOME (GAI) – LIVING EXPENSES] = [2/3 (80-age at the time of death)] x [GAI – (50% of GAI)] = [2/3(80-44)] x [96k – (50% of 96k) = P 1.500.Need not be proved. by reason of the defendant’s culpable action. or amusements that will serve to alleviate moral suffering he/she has undergone. Life Expectancy . therefore. thus is must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. Computed 4 year basis. 26 years old. She was a dancer earning 6-8/twice or thrice a week. Civil liability of defendant must be considered but those also of the employer. in effect. Pleyto v Lomboy (2004)– Phil Rabbit bus driven by Pleyto had a head-on collision with the car boarded by Lomboy. When bill of P200. Failure to present documentary evidence to support a claim for loss of earning capacity of the deceased need not be fatal to its cause. as long as prayed for indemnification for damages. He was paralyzed. need not be alleged. . It is aimed at restoration. of the spiritual status quo ante. merely incidental or dependent upon the award of compensatory damages. People v Barlaan (2007) – D & S was invited for a drink of the 3 suspects Barlaan. Father Mendoza. Soberano v Manila Railroad (18 scra 732) – S vending merchant.306. pain from both sides of cheek. S contributed a little and asked E to pay. their determination depends upon the discretion of the court. walks with stiff neck & no full freedom of arms. manner of life. and the jury are not bound by them. habits. S injured his head. Civil indemnity – P50K – mandatory and granted to heirs of victim without need of proof other than the commission of crime Moral damages – P50k – awarded in criminal offense resulting in physical injuries. it is in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of the defendant. Bonus is merely a privilege that depends on the financial condition of the ER & not a matter or right. as much as possible. loss many teeth. must be duly supported by receipts. the court is called upon the exercise and use its discretion whether the imposition of punitive or exemplary damages even though not expressly prayed or pleaded in the plaintiff’s complaint. While J’s left leg was amputated.Lomboy died while his eldest daughter suffered injuries. took out his knife and the 3 chased d & s. Marchan v Mendoza – Mendoza and family suffered multiple injuries. Esquillon & Domingo. 100/month as boxer – lost use of limbs Exemplary damages – given even if not specifically sought of by plaintiff in complaint. Loss of earning capacity-moral damages – 15k. Asst Supervisor and professional boxer. But thought incapable of pecuniary estimation.50 – supported by receipts. Total earnings less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings and less living and other incidental expenses. It depends largely on state of heath. treatment amounted to 300. social condition.152. Factors considered are: 1. They boarded a bus of Phil Rabbit driven by Marchan which fell into a ditch – very high speed and saw a parked 6x6 truck ahead.Torts and Damages
Introduction of mortality tables is not absolutely essential to prove the life expectancy of a deceased or beneficiary.
loss of earning capacity – item may be considered included in the prayer for “actual damages” and for other “just and equitable reliefs” – art 2206 & 1764 3. Businessman. The law regarding the items of damages that are recoverable in cases of death caused by a crime. hit and windshield and penetrated in Q’s face. a. 30 yrs old. Exception: testimonial evidence would suffice: 1.liable for loss of earning capacity of deceased to damages for death caused by crime or quasi-delict. Art 2204 does not warrant a complete deletion of said item of damages. reckless. D was a manager of a radio station -8. 910 people passed by. Different in Alcantara v Surro where 4 year basis was used.000/yr. The penalties of resclusion perpetua and life imprisonment are 2 different penalties. and does not carry with it accessory penalties.Torts and Damages
Indemnity for loss of earning capacity –P2. Civil liability increased from 12k to 50K –conforming to current doctrine. Art 1764 made it expressly applicable “to death of a passenger caused by the breach of contract by a common carrier. People v Baguio (1991) – Paulino. Statement after stabbed – to get even with Bebot and Frankie.040K.earning less than the minimum wage under labor laws b. brgy tanod. indemnity for the death of the victim of the evidence – 12k without need of evidence and even if mitigating circumstance is present 2. 29 years old. exemplary damages – attended by one or more aggravating circumstances. 2 were suspect of theft in the neighbourhood. reclusion perpetua entails imprisonment for at least 30 years and carries with it accessory penalties. but of the support they received or would have received from him had he not died in consequence of the negligence of petitioner’s agent.self-employed. Support = earnings – necessary expenses of his own living. it becomes the duty of the court to make the award. 33 yrs old. oppressive or malevolent manner. None of parties questioned the propriety of the 4-year basis. LOSS or DAMGES sustained by respondents as dependents and intestate heirs of the deceased – consists not of the full amount of his earnings. 23 stab wounds.600/yr. 4. weather was clear and accident was directly attributable to such. Heirs of Raymundo Castro v Bustos (1969) – Bustos was convicted of homicide for killing Castro. whether the claim therefor is made in the criminal proceedings itself or in a separate civil action –items are identical in both procedures except with attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation which can be awarded only when a separate civil action is instituted .” Parents entitled to moral damages for mental anguish – long period of uncertainty & suffering 10k Exemplary of 10k – Art 2332 only awarded in contracts and quasi-contract if defendant acted in wanton. Life expectancy of 33 1/3 Computation of loss of earning capacity – see Villa Rey Transit case Art 2206(1). no documentary evidence is available –judicial notice 2. Fixed by court –separate from fines 5. stabbed by men. Davila was one of 33 passengers. lawyer & junior partner of father =3. whereas life imprisonment has no definite extent or duration. Pilot did not intercept airway “amber I” as he was supposed to do. Heirs are entitled to the following when death occurs as a result of a crime: 1. 10pm. moral damages – mental anguish – amount fixed by court. Only NET earnings. fraudulent. pook leader. attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation – actual amount (only when separate civil action has been filed or exemplary damages are awarded) 6. employed as daily wage worker earning less than minimum wage under current labor laws. Dec 19 – letter of condolence from PAL. interests in proper cases 7. Can be recovered even by illegitimate descendants and ascendants of deceased – in case of death. hit bullcart with bamboo pole at the end. Life expectancy 33 1/3 years. Q died. 2 mitigating circumstance – passion or obfuscation & voluntary surrender. line of work. farming-3. X GROSS earnings Davila v PAL – plane crash on Nov 1960. once heirs claim such and are able to prove they are entitled thereto. It was a violation of air-traffic rules. 10k/month Villa Rey Transit v CA (1970) – Quintos – passenger of bus owned by Villa Rey.Art 2206CC – GR: documentary evidence is necessary.400/yr. emphasized that indemnity for loss of earning capacity and moral damages are recoverable separately from and in
6 thil lozada
. victim.
to the vendee-plaintiff below and to another person. B was electrocuted. atty’s fees and expenses of litigation Bautista v Maxino – M sold hacienda. Upon stepping on the jeep. X brand new. No reimbursement of salaries where such sum was owing to workers before hacienda was sold and was not assumed by vendee. Precautionary measures were not taken by BEC in wanton disregard of possible consequences. The antenna of the jeep tangled with the hanging open electric wire of Benguet Elec Coop (7 yrs). M again sold it to Guballa. 33 yrs old. GA Machineries v Yaptinchay – GAMi offered to sell a brand new Fordson Dieses Engine to Y. Circumstances. Same rules on damages are generally to be observed. its projected start of operations. P150 daily or P54k annual gross income. co-resp. but the injured party is not to be denied all remedy for that reason alone. B sued G for conspiracy to defraud her as creditor and rejoinder of M. Rejoinder is not motivated by malice or spite. He must produce the best evidence of which his case is susceptible and if that evidence warrants the inference that has been damaged by the loss of profits which he might with reasonable certainty have anticipated but for the defendant’s wrongful act. first to come to a jeep full of slaughtered pigs.88 – freight truck business. he had sort of epileptic seizure. Art 2206 also apply to death of a passenger caused by breach of contract of common carrier. whether death results from a crime or a quasidelict or a breach of contract of carriage. and volume of business was shown. cannot be predetermined. fishpond & all its tools and equipments to B for 7k and B assumed the mortgage on said lot to DBP. liquidated or compensatory damages.Torts and Damages
addition to fixed sum in no. such as fact that vendor (claimant for damages in counterclaim) sold the land twice. When the existence of a loss is established. But after a week. The fact that the vendor of a hacienda and fishpond with mortgage thereon in view of the alleged failure of the vendee. 1985. Life expectancy of 31 years was decreased to 25 years considering the nature and quality of his work. Enjoyment of fruits of property is an attribute of ownership. The benefit to be derived from a contract which one of the parties has absolutely failed to perform is of necessity to some extent. malfunction occurred. Average actual profits should have been presented. No recovery on the value of fruit gathered by vendee on the land sold to him and after said sale even if the vendee has not complied with the payment of the mortgage indebtedness on the land which was assumed by said vendee.
7 thil lozada
. It need not be proved – determination is contingent upon or incidental to the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to claimant. will not justify award of moral damages against plaintiff for filing complaint. it can be merely asked to be fixed by courts. he is entitled to recover. It was revealed that the engine motor number was tampered. Claims lost 54k. absolute certainty as to its amount is not required. 2201. to be exercised in 30 days. It is awarded as a deterrent to socially deleterious actions.need not be pleaded in complaint. Art 2200. B sold it to San Jose Devlpt Comp. Jan 14. to pay the same will not justify reimbursement of said expenses as it was not necessary for the vendor to do so. 1. Even though defendant does not dispute the amount of actual damages does not necessarily imply that the other party outright is entitled to the award of damages. After a year. Exemplary damages – 20k . Theses damages may be subject to Art 2204. Liability of respondent for filing a case and improvident issuance of writ of preliminary injuction at instance of respondent.Imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. Mobil sued and filed injunction against them. Failure of vendee of hacienda and fishponds to pay the alleged additional purchase price which resulted in delay in operations of a rural bank will not justify award of damages where no evidence of proprietorship of the rural bank. G was indebted B. Rentals: 792k + interest. He died. DJ leased it to Shell. a matter of speculation. in addition to moral. Is DJ entitled to damages for wrongful filing of a case against her and the issuance of injunction. In quasi-delicts – act or omission is with gross negligence . Benguet Elec Coop v CA – Bernardo was a meat vendor. . Every travel earns P396. temperate. It is awarded at the courts discretion. Vda De Javellana v CA – DJ granted an option of lease to Mobil. who assumed said mortgage obligation. and that said vendor had a part in getting another to buy the hacienda in question from the vendee-plaintiff which sale did not fully materialize.
In case of fraud (voluntary or wilful act naturally arise from act or omission). NY admitting Olga B for a rotating internship. E invoked rentals for a year No right of retention to F since house was constructed before buying the lot.152. Floreza v de Evangelista – E borrowed P740 from F. Its award is aimed to restoration of spiritual quo ante. Exemplary 5k. Equity not applied when it will not serve justice. CA decreased LE from 30years10years. filing false charges to harass or degrade her. Globe us a quasi-public corporation affected with public interest. if proof is flimsy and nonsubstantial. annual net income of 55k (75k annual gross income – P20k annual personal expenses). L bus exec. job or occupation. It was incumbent upon O to submit evidence in rebuttal. P claims only done good faith and to bring justice. L was forced to buy copra at the open market for the balance that O failed to deliver at a higher price. Rodriquez Luna v IAC – Luna died while in go-cart practice area when it collided with Toyota car driven by de la Rose unlicensed.703). P lost candidate filed an administrative complaint against the BEI incldg V for violation of rules of COMELEC – allowed voters to use carbon papers in preparing their ballots. or at least ascertain the amount of different items in cross-examination. He lost P46. Repurchased lot but F refused to vacate it without paying him the value of house built on the lot. the guilty party is liable for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of the obligation.
8 thil lozada
. 13-yr old. and it must be commensurate to the suffering inflicted. V sued P for damages. O did not submit evidence to rebut the testimony of said witness and the fact that the estimate of the expenses is approximate of the expenses make said estimate inadmissible. There were many contract but O failed to deliver all. ACTUAL or compensatory damages – recoverable because of pecuniary loss in business. Asst Man of Jose Rodriguez Lanuza Sons. Being engaged in go-kart racing will not merit reduction of one’slife expectancy. Moral 5k. Luna 33 yrs old – life expectancy -30 years. Legaspi Oil Co v CA – Legaspi Oil bought copra from Oseraos. his income increased. F was allowed to build a house of strong materials worth 1k in E’s lot. Globe Mackay Cable & Radio Corp v Barrios – Globe failed to deliver a cable gram form Mercy Hosp. GM of Esso Greenhills Serv Center. and that wife succeeded in securing another better paying job 6 mons after. high potential to increase for next 15 years. Father’s liability for damages made bi his son who later become emancipated but is not abroad and could hardly support himself cannot be merely subsidiary. must be proved. attorney’s fees 8k. the position was given to someone else.76. Failure to deliver cablegram – gross negligence. Damages in form of rentals should be given for continued use and occupation of the property.Torts and Damages
Moral damages – 50k – not intended to enrich the complainant but to serve to obviate his/her spiritual suffering by reason of the culpable action of the defendant. that respondents would have had to incur living and sundry expenses. resp thru its different agents at prevailing market price at the perfection of contract. trade or property. otherwise. malice or wanton attitude. Only usufructuary. It caused financial difficulties due to loss of earning capacity for 6mons. E sold lot to F for 1k (740 debt & 260 cash) with right of repurchase of 6years. Eastern Extension was able to deliver such. Actual proof of damages alleged to have been suffered. But V never participated as poll clerk because she was sick and was substituted by Reyes. Not a dangerous sport – low powered vehicle CA erred in increasing the deceased’s possible expenses without increasing his likely revenues in computing damage awards. VP of Oasis. But other cable comp. thereby reduction the net earning which would have received ($2. Perfecto v Gonzales – Vista. Atty’s fee may be allowed legal interest from time of trial court’s decision – damages in quasi-delict. no damages. public school teacher assigned as a poll clerk. As a result. Increased personal expenses from 20k-30k. profession. Direcor of Steadfast Investment Corp. chairman & treasurer of Greenhills Industrial Corp. Filing not malicious. Pres & GM of Rodlum. For only 3 years. Inc. Imposition of compensatory damages upon defendant tantamount to placing a prohibitive premium upon filing of complaints against public officials for misconduct in office. bad faith.
It was sold & Solidbank sued for damages – moral. it is recoverable if breach was wanton.Torts and Damages
Herbosa v CA (2002) – H sued for damages for breach of contract. oppressive or abusive. 2209-2213. moral and exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees must each be independently identified and justified. malicious or in bad faith. They hired PVE. However. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of
9 thil lozada
. MORAL damages -75k . 1956. an injunction was issued but was delivered late. 2226-2228. division of Solid Corp. Cases 201-223. to record their wedding ceremony. 1175.cannot be recovered in an action for breach of contract because such an action is not among those expressly mentioned in Art 2219 of NCC. On the day of auction sale. The claim for actual. 230 NPC v National Merchandising Corp – NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. CB Circular Nos. PVE failed to record of problems in the equipment. 416 and 905. Through their utter disappoint. levied personal properties of Solid Corp. 1959-1961. reckless. 1226-1230. Exemplary damages – 40k – a warning to all entitled to observe good faith and due diligence in fulfilling contractual obligations Attorney’s fees of 10k
Session 12 – Art 1169. A writ of execution was issued. exemplary and attorney’s fees.
Liquidated damages . For 3 mons delivered but short of 60MT. UP claims justified since A failed to deliver manuscript. in view of the foregoing cited provision of the Code. Whether divisible in its nature or not. where one of the obligors failed to comply with what is incumbent upon him. w/c does not exempt seller from liquidated damages. or public order. Polytrade Corp v Blanco – to recover the purchase price of rawhide delivered. Imposition of interest on principal as of time the complaint was filed is not just where litigation prolonged through no fault of defendant. Sued to cancel without giving notice.P39. Where there is partial or irregular performance in a contract providing for liquidated damages. Sy v CA – Distributorship Agreement between Sy and Luzon (producer). NY firm does not want to include the provision of nonavailability of vessel but Namerco still signed the contract. SC: both parties violated contract. UP will pay 30k for 8 installments but A must deliver the manuscript on the specific date. Blanco also protests that attorney’s fees worth 25% of total principal indebtedness as exorbitant. An agent w/c does not disclose to a third person wishing to purchase crude sulphur from its principal. now 1982) Where liquidated damages are agreed upon the same should be enforced instead of awarding only nominal damages. Reduced equivalent to the bidder’s bond or 10% selling price of sulphur. Penalties and liquidated damages are dealt with separately. It is not always the calling of a sum. it is strictly binding upon defendant. as a penalty. In general. It also stipulated that the non-availability of vessel does not constitute as a fortuitous event. Joe’s Radio & Elec v Alto Elec Corp – Bolinao Elec Corp – dealership agreement with Joe’s Radio & Elec Supply. The first instalment given not in full. It stipulated if BEC will fail to comply. with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. He would supply Sy 60 metric tons monthly of ipil-ipil to last for 2 years. Reduced to P15k. An agent who exceeds his authority is personally liable for damages. the stipulation in the contract may be considered as liquidated damages to be paid in case of breach of contract. Namerco filed a surety bond of 45k. agreed with resp for exclusive printing of his book. Such stipulation does not contravene law. In reciprocal obligations. (1957. the amount of indemnity in case of a partial breach. that the court may mitigate the sum stipulated therein since it is to be presumed that the parties only contemplated a total breach of the contract.780 -20% of total cost of 250 TV sets (at price of P1. the fundamental rules governing them still remain basically the same. to be paid for breach of contract. Liquidated damages agreed upon may be equitably reduced. 1 st half delivered but second was not. The contract stipulates that when a violation of contract occurs. plus damages equivalent to 20% of total cost of 250 TV sets. And this is usually so because of the difficulty or sometimes inability of the parties to ascertain or gauge beforehand. author of RPC of Philippines. and not as liquidated damages. liquidated damages which makes it so. 10K Albert v University Publishing Co – Albert. it is the tendency and preference of the law to regard a sum. exceeds the limits of its authority in subsequently signing the contract. the plant stopped the production of sulphur. making them subject to reduction where equity so requires. a notice of 60 days shall be given for final termination of contract and right to liquidated damages of P20k. In the case at bar. morals. SC: attorney’s fees here are in the nature of liquidated damages ad the stipulation therefor is aptly called a penal clause. it was
10 thil lozada
. the 1/3 of the price which is deposited would be returned upon demand.134/set less 30% discount) plus legal interest from date of filing of the original complaint. stated to be payable if a contract is not fulfilled.Torts and Damages
delay in delivery. NPC sued Namerco & surety. Art 1403 does not apply in the case at bar when contract is being enforced as to damages against the agent itself for doing what it did without authority. it can be said. because then it may be apportioned to the loss actually sustained. Failure to correct. the other shall warn to correct such within 60 days. SC however ruled that interest is indicated in trust receipts. that the principal told it via cable that it should not sign the sales contract unless it wish to assume sole responsibility for the shipment. The sulphur was failed to be delivered because of no available vessel and subsequently. It is stipulated in the contract that right to compel for specific performance or recession with interest. the injured party could choose between requiring specific performance of the obligation or its resolution with indemnity for losses and payment of interest. BEC will deliver 500 TV sets. Blance questions the grant of RTC of interest of 1% monthly since no such stipulation appears in sales confirmation orders. nevertheless. Liquidated damages was equitably reduced.
made arrears in monthly rentals & non-payment of amusement taxes. They made an agreement not to sell the stocks until after 1 year.148 sqm lot for P85k within 60 days. 100k. L claims liquidated damages is immoral and iniquitous. No liquidated damages in
11 thil lozada
. its creditors. lessor and Sy. Lambert v Fox – John R. After 9 mons. the party will pay 1k as liquidated damages. A provision which calls for the forfeiture of the remaining deposit still in the possession of the lessor.when the principal obligation has been partly or irregularly fulfilled and the court can see that the person demanding the penalty has received the benefit of such or irregular performance. in the absence of other considerations. they are treated the same legally. otherwise he shall be liable for additional 5k.Torts and Damages
in fact divided by an offer and acceptance of part performance. But it was shown that L was not the sole owner. L will return 5k within 15 days after lapse of 60 day period. RTC: T to pay balance + legal interest + 25% of such as attys fees (liquidated damages). stationery and book store. OVEC regained possession. It is like the case of an obligation to perform two more independent acts. L & T are both property owners and men of affairs who are presumed to know how to protect their interests in dealing with other parties. When there is a stipulation to the contrary 2. if one is performed. It could not be assailed when the ground of being iniquitous or unconscionable was not mentioned in his brief. without prejudice to any other obligation still owing. it is not a case for the recovery of the liquidated damages Country Bankers Ins Corp v CA – OVEC. Lawyers Coop v Tabora – Tabora bough Amjur (48 vol plus 4 vols of AmJur Gen Index). Limjoco v CTA – Limjoco received 5k as earnest money and obliged to sell to Tan 3. There is no difference between a penalty and liquidated damages. L undertook to arrange with RFC the assumption of mortgage lien but failed to do such.C. 25% of amount due as attorney’s fees. including L & F. failure to observe such. 1228. Edgar & Co. RTC misapprehended. Art 1226 (1). Mc Cullough. its strong competitor. After 2 years. When the obligor is guilty of fraud Penalty can’t substitute for 100k (a month increase in rental) damage resulting from injunction against 290k cash deposit. GR: Parties who are competent to contract may make such agreements within the limitations of the law and public policy as they desire. The arrears in rental. Fox sold it to E. he was a widower and his children are co-owners. with a provision for single liquidated damages for nonperformance. He also submitted a draft to deed of sale but Tan refused to accept. agreed to take over the business & accept stocks as payment of debt. so far as legal results are concerned. atty fees. Obligo is sued for refusal to pay the agreed penalty 3. A penal clause is an accessory obligation which the parties attach to a principal obligation for the purpose of insuring the performance thereof by imposing on the debtor a special presentation (generally consisting in the payment of a sum of money) in case the obligation is not fulfilled or is irregularly or inadequately fulfilled. Primary purpose: to avoid proving the damages to recover sum stipulated.damages sustained not as a result of injunction. which is in line with an express stipulation of the contract. Bond shall and may answer only for damages w/c OVEC may suffer as a result of the injunction. L & F became the largest stockholder. Whatever differences exists between them as a matter of language. burned. T refused to pay the balance since loss is force majeure and he still not the owner until full payment was made. OVEC demands for repossession. the building where it was stored. and not the other. On the night delivered. Exceptions: purpose: to punish obligor 1. SC: petitioner was under no compulsion to enter into such stipulation. but must be as liquidated damages. lessee of theatres for 6 years. unmeritted amounts of amusement tax delinquency. Exceptions: court is authorized to intervene for the purpose of reducing a penalty stipulated in the contract to the extent of benefits . in the event of the termination or cancellation of the agreement by reason of the lessee's violation of any of the terms and conditions of the agreement is a penal clause that may be validly entered into. RTC claims agreement it only good until the corporation reached a sound financial basis. Not an illegal stipulation nor restraint of trade since it protects the corporation and has a reasonable length of time. and that the courts will enforce them according to their terms. L claims it was because Tan refused to have his credit rating investigated. Failed to get their signatures. Failure to perform such.
the 2 being distinct concepts which may be separately be demanded." the Monetary Board. Viloria v CA – V was the manager of Service Center of Phils.” The legal rate of interest before July 29. A debtor should not be made to pay liquidated damages when his denial to pay the balance of the account is not due to bad faith.189%/annum and penalty of 5% every month of outstanding balance. resulting from such a breach. and only on such date that it was increased to 12% by CB Circular No 416. Hence. which is not exactly the same as a surcharge or a penalty. mode of breach and its consequencesm supervening realities.638. Ligutan v CA – L secured a loan of 120k with interest of 15. INTEREST RATE of 12% .775. may not equally justify the non-payment or reduction of interest. It is a question that can be partly subjective and partly objective. His accumulated P179.74. in its Resolution No. 1974 was only 6%. PENALTY CLAUSE – an accessory undertaking to assume greater liability on the part of an obligor in case of breach of an obligation. The amount of P18. goods or credits and the rate allowed in judgments. It depends on type. Liam Law v Olmypic Sawmill Co. R granted the project.584. standing and relationship of parties and addressed to the sound discretion of the court. shall be twelve per cent (12 %) per annum.611. Interest prescribed in loan financing arrangements is a fundamental part of the banking business and the core of a bank’s existence.penalty and interest – runs from time of finality of judgment -interest rate per annum on principal amount – runs from date of filing of complaint. CB Circular No 416: July 29. extent and purpose of the penalty. A stipulated penalty may be equitably reduced by the courts it is iniquitous or unconscionable or it the principal obligation has been partly or irregularly complied with. L only paid P5.78 is not part of the principal debt but it represents rather the interest and penalty charges on the advances made by petitioner to BKME as of the time of filing of the complaint. but CB disapproved. It 3% monthy interest exorbitant and 5% monthly penalty violated Art 1226. the appropriate interest rate to be applied thereon is 12% per annum reckoned from the time of finality of judgment until fully paid as said amount constitutes a judgment award. despite an express stipulation therefor in a valid agreement. It is only when the parties to a contract have failed to fix the rate of interest or when such amount is unwarranted that the Court will apply the 12% interest per annum on a loan or forbearance of money. for what could be the liquidated damages. both the penalty and the interest can be collected by the creditor. as amended. Philguarantee issued a counterguarantee. required to issue performance bond. in effect.029. in the absence of express contract as to such rate of interest. 1974 “By virtue of the authority granted to it under Section 1 of Act No. The court has to enforce the contractual stipulations in the manner that they have been agreed upon for as long as they are not unconscionable or contrary to morals and public policy. 1974. INTERESTS: rationale: COST of MONEY.219. 1622 dated July 29. Gobonseng v Unibancard Corp – G applied for credit card with monthly credit limit of 10k from Unibancard. Purpose: to strengthen the coercive force of the obligation and to provide. Trade & Inv Den Corp v Roblett Industrial Cons Corp – R filed a bid in Kuwait to subcontract the supply of skilled and semi-skilled workers for refinery project. When he resigned he filed a complaint to collect his share in the profitsharing agreement of the company. if there is an agreement to that effect. he defaulted in paying. A penalty stipulation is not necessarily preclusive of interest. Consequently.Torts and Damages
absence of bad faith. 2655. nature of obligation. The company refused and instead sought to recover the unliquidated cash advances. R filed a bid bond of 1% of total proposed tender price or 159.25 should commence on 5 June 1990. Kuwait deemed breached subcontract and bid bond was confiscated. What may justify a court in not allowing the creditor to impose full surcharges and penalties. Inc – Liam Law loaned 10k without interest to Olympic. Where the contract stipulates the rate of interest and the amount of penalty to be paid in case of failure to pay the obligation within a given period. on the principal amount of P11. the 16% interest per annum. and 10% of total amount as attorney’s fees from Security Bank.05 KD.781. O was granted an extension of 3
12 thil lozada
. Circular should not be given retrospective operation. has prescribed that the rate of interest for the loan or forbearance of any money. otherwise known as the "Usury Law. the date of the filing of the complaint.
13 thil lozada
.35M. In four months. nothing therein could possibly be read as granting the lender carte blanche authority to raise interest rate to levels which would either enslave its borrower or lead to haemorrhaging of his assets. Increases of interest rate unilaterally imposed by respondent bank without petitioner’s assent are violative of the principle of mutuality of contracts in Art 1308 of CC. and other costs. lawful as it is considered as liquidated damages. The 6K for attorney’s fees and legal interest. UCPB v Beluso – B granted a credit line of P2. Demand letters is not sufficient proof of agreement on 34% interest per annum. The increases in violation of Credit Agreement that its terms “may be amended only by an instrument in writing signed by party to be bound as burdened by such amendment” Art 1956. Art 1310: Courts are granted authority to reduce/increase interest rates equitably.” Bank can increase the interest but can also decrease. Floirendo Jr v Metrobank – F loaned for 1M for Reymill Realty. Any contract which appears to be heavily weighed in favor of one of the parties so as to lead to an unconscionable result is void. Art 1956: no interest shall be due unless it has been expressly stipulated in writing. Failed to pay. UCPB was granted both choices which presents opportunity to fix the rate at will. While the Usury Law ceiling on interest rate was lifted by CB Circular No 905.446% per annum for 1 st 30 days. the 18% interest rate raised to 48%. In case at bar. It only presented demand letters which imposes such.: The contract must bind both contracting parties. who is alleging usury. K would resell fertilizer to customers and shall issue Delivery Orders. Usury now legally non-existent under CB Circular No 905. 6k additional for 10k principal.692. not the plaintiff. The contract stipulates that interest will be “within limits allowed by law. Padilla never agreed in writing to pay interest increased fixed by PNB beyond 24% per annum. with 4 lands mortgaged. A fixed margin over the reference rate like 3% so that parties can easily determine the interest rate by applying simple arithmetic. PNB v CA and Padilla – Padilla asked for a loan of 1. Interest chargeable now depends upon agreement of lender and borrower.Torts and Damages
months but loan increased to 16K. Violation of mutuality principle of contracts. It was renewed for another year but with interest at 15. UCPB applied interest rates on different promissory notes ranging from 18%-34%.783. its validity or compliance cannot be left to the will of one of them.8M with 18% interest per annum. if Monetary Board is not authorized to make changes for more than every 12 mons. only present to Philphos warehouse for release. They paid 763. 34% interest per annum on principal claim of Philphos is its unilateral act and no evidence was presented that it was stipulated by the parties.244%. increases in interest is null and void.03. K claims withdrawals signed by unauthorized withdrawals. even less so may a bank which is subordinate to the Board. in accordance with the maximum interest rate imposed by law or Monetary Board. F paid the arrears but M still foreclosed mortgaged lands. went to 30. not applicable to a case where it is the defendant. PNB relied on own Board Resolution but such are neither laws nor resolutions of Monetary Board. Interest varied. Provision that claim of usury deemed admitted if it was not denied specifically and under oath. demanded to pay if not would charge 34% interest per annum.543 + 25% attorney’s fees. Contract stipulates “with interest at the rate indicative of DBD retail rate or as determined by the Branch Head. UCPB foreclosed mortgaged to secure payment of debt of P3.932. Phil Phosphate Fertilizer Corp v Kamalig Resources Inc – K purchased fertilizer from Philphos issued Sales Official Receipt.” Violated Art 1308. CB Circular No 905 removed Usury Law ceiling interest rates but it did not authorize PNB to unilaterally and successively increase the agreed interest rates from 18% to 48% in violation of PD 116. subject to upward/downward adjustment every 30 days thereafter” and a penalty charge of 18% per annum “based on any unpaid principal to be computed from date of default until payment of the obligation.603. considered repealed with retroactive effect. O claims 6k as usurious interest. Rules of Court as to the allegations of usury being procedural in nature. P claims K has made overwithdrawals. UCPB demanded payment of total debt of P2. PD 116 Sec 2 provides that Monetary Board: interest rate changes for loans or renewal thereof shall not be made oftener than once every twelve months .
to the same extent as the general government. A demand established by judgment must be understood as bearing interest whether expressly so stated or not. B offered to Y to pay in terms of his stocks in a rural bank. Applicable only to debts and claims with respect to which no stipulation for interest has been made As to succeeding instalments. iniquitous and unconscionable. it is sought to be compensated through indemnity. 12% interest per annum from April 29. after which the whole shall bear interest at the contract rate of 5% per annum until paid. An interest rate of 4% per month or 48% per annum is highly unconscionable and inordinate.e. promissory notes stipulates interest rate of 4% for 3months. It is sufficient basis to impose a 12% legal interest in favor of petitioner in case at bar as what we have voided is merely stipulated rate of interest and not stipulation that the loan shall earn interest.
While the Usury Law has been suspended by CB Circular No 905. Svendsen v People – Reyes extended a loan to Svendsen for 200k with interest of 10% a month. still stipulated interest rates are illegal if they are unconscionable – nothing in the said circular grants leaders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to hemorrhaging of their assets. 12% interest per annum on total amount after judgment becomes final and executory until obligation is satisfied. computed from the date of judicial demand. and parties to a loan agreement have been given wide latitude to agree on any interest rate. shall be no less than 10k. 200k was paid. 2. to pay additional amount equivalent to 10% of principal amount plus attorney’s fee. 25 hec lot of Zobel minors was bought for such purpose. it was not paid. after which interest upon the whole shall be computed at the same rate. which is civil in nature.5M. After default occurred the defendant became liable for interest as damages regardless of the absence of any express stipulation for interest and regardless of the statement that this instalment should draw no interest.Torts and Damages
In case at bar. they are inexistent and void from the beginning. if not against the law. Bulos Jr v Yasuma – Dr. Found overpricing. Applicable only to obligations containing stipulation for interest. A municipal corporation does not enjoy immunity from liability for interest.. While the Usury Law has been suspended by CB Circular No 905. effective on January 1. After default. Interest amounted to 380K. Stipulation authorizing such interest
1. Art 1109. The legal interest rate of 12% should apply. when assessed as damages for the non-payment of a debt. effective on January 1. 1999 ( date of the check).
the civil indemnity to P16k = unpaid interest on P200k loan at 12% per annum as of Feb 2. As to 1st instalment. the social injury is sought to be repaired through the imposition of the corresponding penalty. Contract contains that 1st instalment was not to bear interest but next 5 instalments were to bear 5% interest per annum. The Court deems in fair to adjust:
14 thil lozada
. whereas with respect to the personal injury of the victim. Dr Lim assigned it to Bulos. Sec 510 of CIvPro – interest thus accruing must be consolidated with the principal as of the date of the judgment of the lower court. Zobel v City of Manila – City of Manila wanted to establish a cemetery. Where interest is contracted for at a given rate the contract obligation to pay interest is not merged in the judgment but remains in full force until the debt is paid. 1983. Balance paid thru check but bounce. Filed complaint for violation of BP 22. it does not specify any margin above or below the DBD retail rate. and parties to a loan agreement have been given wide latitude to agree on any interest rate.
are contra bonos mores. The interest rate of 10% monthly is clearly excessive. 1999 (date of judicial demand. i. SC upheld the contract stipulation for compounding of interest. For in criminal case. Lim loaned form Yasuma 2. The stipulation that it would draw no interest was made in the expectation that the obligation would be paid upon date stipulated. 3. 1983. as such. Manila passed an ordinance for appropriation for such. it is to be treated as if nothing had been said about interest at all. interest accrued up to the date of filing of complaint must be consolidated as of that date with the capital. still stipulated interest rates are illegal if they are unconscionable – nothing in the said circular grants leaders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to hemorrhaging of their assets. date of filing of information up to finality of judgment). S is civilly liable. if brought to court.
Ruiz claims as co-owner & asked B to stop paying. but defendant’s default in crediting the plaintiff with the proceeds of the sale of sugar.600 + legal interest. If vendee is in default in the payment of the price of the thing sold. Forbearances of any money. According to this. administrator of estate of Ohta. When B was about to pay the 2nd. under Art 2209 CC. the penalty is not to be added to the interest for the determination of whether the interest exceeds the rate fixed by the law. But considering that the obligation was partly performed. Right of suspension of payment ended as soon as “the vendor has caused the disturbance or danger to cease. SC: Such stipulation is not usurious. Where the promissory note contains a stipulation to the effect that if the obligation should become the subject of judicial action a certain percentage of the principal should be added to cover expenses of collection. Usury Law deals with interest on: 1. Session 13 – Art 2209-2213. interest upon this item will not be allowed prior to the date of the judgment in the trial court. Judgment against the administrator should be credited with whatever should be made out of the property of the principal debtor. The law applicable is Art 2209 CC – legal interest is 6% per annum. much less forbearances of any money. in the suit for collection. 12% interest per annum & failure to pay at maturity + 25% penalty of such balance. Soriano v Cia General de Tabacos – crop loan account granted to S. Bareng v CA – B bought from Algegria a cinematographic equipment for 15k. Any other kind of monetary judgment which has nothing to do with. and which may be demanded separately. 5K balance to be paid 4 promissory notes. Should there be such an agreement. Total indebtedness continue to charge 7% per annum compounded every six months. and it would have been the duty of the sheriff to allow such credit in this case even in the absence of direction to that effect. Loans 2. RTC: pay 3. A & R reached a compromise and sued B for the balance. and making use of the power given to the court by article 1154 of the Civil Code. goods. 1974 from the filing of the complaint. 10k already paid. Obligation to pay any unpaid balance thereof did not cease to be liquidated and determined simply because vendor and vendee. nor involving loans or forbearance of any money. Cases 224-247 Bachrach Motors v Espiritu – E bought 2 trucks but failed to pay full amounts. or credits 3. Monetary Board increased legal interest rate from 6% per annum to 12%. CB Circular No 416 was issued pursuant to PD 116 which amended Act No 2655 (Usury Law). Inouye. or credits. goods. disagreed as to its amount. Accrued interest draws legal interest from the time that the suit is filed for its recovery. 1st instalment of 1k paid.” when compromise between A & R was reached. Reformina v Tomol Jr – RTc resolution – declaring the judgment of 370K shall bear legal interest rate of 12% per annum pursuant to CB Circular No 416 dated July 29. or credits does not fall within the coverage of CB Circular No 416 Action for damages for injury to persons and loss of property and does not involve any loan. RTC: “or for such parts of said amounts as may remain unpaid after execution of this case is returned by this sheriff” – SC: does not have the effect of rendering the judgment indefinite. Art 1152 permits agreement upon penalty apart from interest . B claims not liable for interest since suspension of payment is justified. because the event which gave rise to the plaintiff’s right to recover interest was not a conventional obligation. S would deliver piculs of export sugar as payment but a part of such did not include the proceeds of sale. Rates allowed in judgments – referred to judgments in litigations involving loans or forbearance of any money. KS Ohta died. goods or credits. Only 400 was paid even though A is demanding for such. 416 and 905. he is liable to pay legal interest
15 thil lozada
. Where the plaintiff is entitled to the payment of interest on the various amounts due from the defendant by way of damages. goods. CB Circular Nos. since said rate was fixed only for the interest. and said interest did not arise from an obligation of the defendant to pay the same on a contractual basis.Torts and Damages
Seton Donne v Inouye – KS Ohta was a guarantor for purchase price in buying a lot to Donna for 30k. interest is not collectible on the accrued interest. the penalty does not include the interest. this penalty is reduced to 10% of the unpaid debt.
After a few payments. It already sold the logs to a Japanese company but failed to deliver. There is no doubt that the petitioner is liable for both the stipulated monetary interest and the stipulated penalty charge. It was insured with Mercantile Insurance Company. Interest does not run from the time the obligation becomes due.62. Penalty clauses can be in the form of penalty or compensatory interest. or from Nov 1.600 from Plaridel Surety. Tan v CA – Tan asked 2 loans amounting to 4M.421. Art 2212. Inc v Ca – 2 fiber drums of riboflavin were shipped from Japan thru delivery vessel of Eastern Shipping. 1953. Express stipulation in the promissory note permitting compounding interest. Interest began to run on the penalty interest upon the filing of the complaint in court. but from the filing of the complaint. 1953. last case. Failed to make any payment: 6. Mercantile was compelled to pay losses. Galang. An obligation to pay interest is due without need of demand where the contract stipulates from what time interest will be counted. 1 drum was in bad order because it was opened and unsealed. but by reason of its failure to pay when demanded and for having compelled the plaintiff to resort to the courts to obtain payment. he defaulted. a reduction of penalty charge is justified. Is interest on claim of Mercantile Insurance should commence from date of filing of complaint at rate of 12% per annum.500 with 12% interest. F would pay 12% interest a year from the date of default plus 25% attorney’s fees and liquidated damages. It is changed to a straight 12% per annum. The surety is made to pay interest.03. and compounding it is sanctioned by and allowed pursuant to Art 1959 considering: 1. and as such the two are different and distinct from each other and may be demanded separately. PLG sued & asks for bond payment. The penalty charge of two percent (2%) per month in the case at bar began to accrue from the time of default by the petitioner. In case of default. Petitioner made partial payments which showed his good faith.Torts and Damages
from the date of filing of complaint unless he deposits in Court the amount due at the start of the action. 2. because the claim is unliquidated? The legal interest to be paid is 6% on the amount due computed from the decision. Outstanding balance of P4. Creditors suing on a suretyship bond may recover from the surety as part of their damages. PLG filed for advance payment & expected delivery. SC explained the decision:
16 thil lozada
. Plaridel Surety & insurance Co v PL Galang Machinery Co – PL Galang & San Jose agreed that SJ would peel and cut veneer logs at P60 for PL. Tan bound to pay interest on total amount of the principal. A 12% interest.915. Due to negligence of Eastern. Promissory note expressly provides for the imposition of both interest (14% per annum plus 3% service charge) and penalties (2% per month) in case of default on part of petitioner in payment of subject restructured loan. interest is payable from such time. in lieu of 6% shall be imposed on such amount upon finality of this decision until payment thereof. interest at the legal rate even if the surety would thereby become liable to pay more than the total amount stipulated in the bond. 1988. SJ filed a performance bond of P30. Does interest accrue from the date of first demand or when the obligation becomes due and demandable. The contract expressly stipulates the interest of 12% per annum commence from date of execution of said document . Debt: 3.411. as agreed upon by the parties? The defendants admitted not only the amount of the balance of the plaintiff but also the 12% interest from Nov 1.32. The penalty charge is also called penalty or compensatory interest. Piczon v Piczon – Piczon as guarantor sentence to pay 12. of the court a quo. If the parties stipulate this kind of agreement.735. dated February 3. CCP sued for payment of Tan but Tan claims merely accommodated a friend but he cannot locate him.088. not by reason of the contract. Whether interest will be paid on the balance from the time that the complaint was flied. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co v Delgado – Firestone agreed to sell goods and merchandise to Dee for Caltex quick service station. CC permit an agreement upon a penalty apart from the monetary interest. Reformina v Tomol Jr – refer to page 13. the penalty does not include the monetary interest. monetary interest and penalty interest. important case Eastern Shipping Lines. Upon arrival. and not from the date of the filing of the complaint.
When an obligation. i.e. on the other hand. is breached. as well as the accrual thereof.the basic issue focuses on the application of either the 6% (under the Civil Code) or 12% (under the Central Bank Circular) interest per annum. i. explaining that "if the suit were for damages. It is easily discernible in these cases that there has been a consistent holding that the Central Bank Circular imposing the 12% interest per annum applies only to loans or forbearance 16 of money. First group . is imposed. Escani v Ortigas Jr – Falcon Corp consists of 2 groups of stockholder in the case at bar. 2 nd:
17 thil lozada
. too. the contravenor can be held liable for damages. the interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. quasi-contracts. The actual base for the computation of legal interest shall. The provisions under Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining the measure of recoverable damages. shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. the rate of legal interest.' then.'" American Express International v. 'unliquidated and not known until definitely ascertained.e. this interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a forbearance of credit. be on the amount finally adjudged. II. the "first group" which remained consistent in holding that the running of the legal interest should be from the time of the filing of the complaint until fully paid. Second group . and it consists in the payment of a sum of money.e. IAC. from judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code. No interest. The cases discussed can be classified into 2 groups according to similarity of issues involved and the
corresponding rulings rendered by the court 2. law. When the obligation is breached." The Nakpil and Sons case ruled that 12% interest per annum should be imposed from the finality of the decision until the judgment amount is paid. whether the case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2.. Unlike. above. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executory. or one of indemnity for damage.did not alter the pronounced rule on the application of the 6% or 12% interest per annum. in any case.. ortigas. 1 st. 17 depending on whether or not the amount involved is a loan or forbearance.e.. introduced a different time frame for reckoning the 6% interest by ordering it to be "computed from the finality of (the) decision until paid . 3. and that the 6% interest under the Civil Code governs when the transaction involves the payment of indemnities in the concept of damage arising from the breach or a delay in the performance of obligations in general. Civil Code) but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the time the demand is made. goods or credits. assessed and determined by the courts after proof. i. With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory damages. a common time frame in the computation of the 6% interest per annum has been applied. interest 'should be from the date of the decision. the interest shall begin to run only from the date the judgment of the court is made (at which time the quantification of damages may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained). the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. 3. not constituting a loan or forbearance of money. the rate of interest shall be 12% per annum to be computed from default. delicts or quasi-delicts is breached. where the demand is established with reasonable certainty. shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand can be established with reasonable certainty. scholey. as follows: 1. Rule of thumb for future guidance
I. Accordingly. Furthermore. that in these cases. however. When an obligation. inductive. however. In the absence of stipulation. 4. the "second group" varied on the commencement of the running of the legal interest. an interest on the amount of damages awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. Malayan held that the amount awarded should bear legal interest from the date of the decision of the court a quo. on the one hand. as well as to judgments involving such loan or forbearance of money. a loan or forbearance of money. Observe. from the time the complaint is filed until the adjudged amount is fully paid. goods or credits.Torts and Damages 1. contracts. regardless of its source.. the rate of interest. 2. i. 1169. the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing.
But became delinquent in paying rentals. FORBEARANCE – a contractual obligation of lender or creditor to refrain. obligated to redry. DSM Cons & Dev Corp v CA – Megaworld hired DSM to contruct condo. service PVTA at government price. Sued for ejectment. FNCB Finance v Estavillo – E bought a Ford Fiera and made a promissory note for payment of balance and penalty of 2. 1993 until fully paid.Torts and Damages
Escano. 6% computed from date of filing of complaint. Art 1959. from the time it was judicially or extrajudicially demanded. What they are claiming are specific percentages definitely provided under the law. the parties agreed on an increased rate of interest to 12% per annum. Not entitled to compounding of interest. PVTA v Tensuan – Management contract was executed between resp cooperative of farmers to sell dry tobacco to CCP and CCP. goods or credit. Petitioner prayed for “14% interest per annum from May 6.. during a given period of time. on the outstanding balance. The Note already stipulated a late payment penalty of 2. Refer to Eastern Shipping no. It is merely a matter of mathematically computing the exact money value thereof. Country Bankers Insurance Corp v Lianga Bay & Community Multi-Purpose Cooperative. Radiowealth Finance Co v Del Rosario – Del Rosario delivered promissory note but defaulted in payment. Refer to Reformina case Interest is due from the moment there is a delay on the part of the obligor to perform his obligation.5% in case of default and acceleration clause. Manufacturers Bldg Inc v CA – PMMS leased part of Manufacturer’s Building. i. no agreed upon. It was caught on fire but CB refused claim. the proper forum for clarifying the same is the CIAC (imposed said rate). Art 2209. derived from the production during the crop years involved. His vehicle was seized for being in arrears but claims on time. 2undertakings were signed by stockholders where solidary liability with company in their private capacity. inasmuch as the annual sugar production and the amount of molasses and bagasse. not the CA. Interest must be 12% per annum. Silos & Matti. only as joint debtor & interest rate is 6% not 12%. with legal interest of 12% per annum. are undisputed and are in fact based on the records of petitioner. Falcon loaned from PDCP $320. Refer to reformina v tomol. Lianga Bay entered into a fire insurance with Country Bankers for stocks-in-trade against fire. Based on 2nd mortgage. UNLIQUIDATED DAMAGES or CLAIMS are those which are not or cannot be known until definitely ascertained. RA 809 was enacted compelling increased participation of majority planters. But still failed to comply. Proper interest rate is 6%. They had a share of 60% in sugar produced. PMMS offered to pay obligation within 6mons from execution of 2nd mortgage. then it shall be deemed included in the stipulation for a late payment penalty. Differences in billings arose. insurance claim not a forbearance of money. 2 years after. the interest is 12% per annum from time of extra-judicial demand. Art 2213. Catungal v Hao – The back rental in this case being equivalent to a loan or forbearance of money. Deemed included in penalty. CA: 6 condo units as payment.e. Where payment of interest is not expressly provided in the promissory note. Compromise agreement. 1 st groups ceded control of corp to avoid debt. Nowhere in jurisprudence has a legal rate interest been imposed as a flat rate rather than on a per annum basis. 4.5% monthy to be added to each unpaid instalment until fully paid. assessed and determined by the courts after presentation of proof. Central Azucarera de Bais v CA – Def are sugar cane planters milling their sugarcane with petitioner without any written milling contracts. Central gives 62% share for those who signed but 60% share if without milling contract. Payment of interest was not expressly stipulated in the Note. Rate of interest thereon shall be 12% per annum to be computed form default.. The controversy on the application of the 6% rate of interest.” We disagree. in turn. from judicial or extrajudicial demand. 2nd group claims that if liable.
18 thil lozada
. procure. PDCP sued for collection of debt.000. from requiring the borrower or debtor to repay a loan or debt then due and payable. The rate of interest which they might have agreed upon earlier has been obliterated or superseded by the new agreement. i. In case at bar. Inc – Country Bankers is a domestic corp.e.
as a matter of law. which fixes the legal rate of interest at 12% per annum is not applicable here since the circular applies only to loans or forbearance of money. where on the drinking spree before the incident. the rate shall be 12% per annum. and in the absence of a stipulation of a particular rate of penalty interest. It is not for respondent court a quo to change the stipulations in the contract where it is not illegal. (1) 60k. R & R claims not their obligation. Filed a collection case.665.333. Circular No. Central Bank Circular No. and not from the filing of the complaint against the accused. were relieved from the payment not only of penalty or compensatory interest at the rate of twenty-four percent (24%) per annum but also of regular or monetary interest of seventeen percent (17%) per annum.100k. and in the absence thereof. R & R acquired another loan.00. The fact that the respondent Aquino spouses were not in default did not mean that they. 4mons. We believe and so hold that since respondent Aquino spouses were held not to have been in delay. 61 – 3 promissory notes granted to Eusebio. To make the latter law applicable to any case other than those specifically provided for by the Usury Law would be to violate the principle of undue delegation of legislative powers since the Monetary Board will be exercising legislative functions which was beyond the intendment of P. 83. While the Usury Law ceiling on interest rates was lifted by C.90. it was a contract of sale wherein there was default in the payment of the price and interest was awarded therefor. 1974. The payment of regular interest constitutes the price or cost of the use of money and thus. But fire destroyed before grading & weighing but was already unloaded. In the case at bar. (2) 136. Art 1256 People v Iglesia – accused stabbed the victim on the left chest with kitchen knife. Lyndon Phar sued to collect balance. and if no regular interest had been agreed upon.517 for 1 year. The appropriate measure for damages in case of delay in discharging an obligation consisting of the payment of a sum or money. legal rate. regular interest continues to accrue since the debtor continues to use such principal amount. Security Bank & Trust Co.B. and (b) regular or monetary interest in the amount of seventeen percent (17%) per annum. the interest due should be that stipulated in writing.Torts and Damages
Advanced payment. 905. The balance are 16. See Reformina v Tomol. Art 1306. only in the absence of a stipulation can the court impose the 12% rate of interest. 65k. 116. The interest on the damages awarded should be computed from the time of the finality of the decision. PNB v CA The rate of interest was agreed upon by the parties freely. Hence. They were not liable for penalty or compensatory interest. 120K. Solangon v Salazar – 2 loans with the mortgage on the same land. they were properly liable only for: (a) the principal of the loan or P110. PNB v CA – Isabela issued several checks as payment for medicines purchased. It was delivered to seller’s agent but agent did not turn over 23 checks amounting to 98. Is interest 6% or 12%?
19 thil lozada
. Br. The law applicable is Art 2209.691. until the principal sum due is returned to the creditor. CB Circular No 905. then payment of legal interest or six percent (6%) per annum. then the payment of additional interest at a rate equal to the regular monetary interest. Article 2209 CC. is the payment of penalty interest at the rate agreed upon.000. 2nd loan unable to pay but expressed willingness to pay. legal rate. A stipulated interest rate of 6% per month or 72% per annum is definitely outrageous and inordinate – an interest of 12% per annum is deemed fair and reasonable. The regular or monetary interest continued to accrue under the terms of the relevant promissory note until actual payment is effected. Ventura became the co-maker – 100k. fixed by the promissory note in Account No.65k. respondent did not question that rate. Sec 1 and 2. Significantly. The interest here is therefore not within the contemplation of the Usury Law. IF-82-0904-AA at two percent (2%) per month or twenty-four (24%) per annum.D. 4 months. They requested the release of pledge in the shares of stocks but the State refused claiming that a balance on first loan has not yet paid. V RTC Makati. R & R pledged shares of stock. 416 dated July 29. the rate of legal interest shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. State Investment House v CA – Refugio & Rafael Aquino accommodated Jose and Marcelina Aquino to a loan of P375k in the State Investment. goods or credits and court judgment thereon. 23% interest per annum. When the judgment of the Court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executor. In a loan or forbearance of money. nothing in the said circular grants lenders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to a hemorrhaging of their assets. (3) 230k. 6% interest monthly.
compensates for pecuniary loss incurred and proved.a. The case became final and executory on August 25. 1993. 1982) x 12% x no. 248-268 Ramos v CA – The amount of damages which should be
The principal amount of loans corresponding to each trust receipt must earn an interest at the rate of sixteen percent (16%) per annum with the stipulated service charge of two percent (2%) per annum on the loan principal or the outstanding balance thereof." Thus. 16% interest p. should be imposed. The building was destroyed but indemnity was denied. computed from the date of the filing of the complaint (March 12. the payment of 12% legal interest per annum should commence from August 25. of years from demand (March 9. is deemed to be equivalent to a forbearance of credit. the date the decision of the trial court became final. from the nature of the case. of years until finality of judgment Attorney’s fees is 10% of the total amount computed as of finality of judgment Total amount due as of the date of finality of judgment will earn an interest of 12% per annum until fully paid. 2% p. Alfa’s liability must not exceed 4M and 7. up to the time of trial. Eastern filed a motion with check for 448. and to be computed from the time the judgment became final and executory until fully satisfied. The interest of 16% percent per annum. – service charge 3. the "interim period from the finality of judgment awarding a monetary claim and until payment thereof. The actual base for the computation of this 12% interest after the judgment in this damage suit became final shall be the amount adjudged (P98.a. 1982) until finality of judgment Interest on interest = Interest computed as of the filing of the complaint (March 12. Tan sued for breach of contract. 1993. 1982) until finality of this Court’s Decision.a. Trust receipt was executed. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Service charge = principal x 2% per annum x no. meet pecuniary loss certain to be suffered but which could not.
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE = principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on interest Interest = principal x 16 % per annum x no.90). 2. 1994. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Penalty = principal x 6% per annum x no. – penalty or liquidated damages 4. No. be made with
. as long as unpaid. 96. 2. Cases 69 (321 scra 584). 6% p. up to September 30. Attorney’s fees and costs of collection. and such interest as may accrue thereon and expenses incurred. 1982).
1�wphi1.691. The court allowed the imposition of 12% legal interest p. if they are to adequately and correctly respond to the injury caused: 1. on money judgment from the date of its finality until fully paid. 416.a. Hence. the agreed “cut-off date” for the payment of legal interest. 201. in accordance with the pronouncement in Eastern Shipping the rate of 12% p." Once the judgment becomes final and executory. the total unpaid amount (principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on the interest) computed shall earn interest of 12% per annum until satisfied. Trust Receipts stipulated such: 1. From such date of finality. When an obligation arises "from a contract of purchase and sale and not from a contract of loan or mutuum. until finality of Judgment." the applicable rate is "6% per annum as provided in Article 2209 of the NCC and not the rate of 12% per annum as provided in (CB) Cir. Eastern Assurance & Surety Corp v CA – Tan insured his building against fire for 250k with Eastern.a. 239. RCBC v Alfa RTW Manufacturing Corp – Alfa RTW granted LOC by RCBC for purchase of raw materials of garment business.750 (principal amount + 6% interest). Session 14 – Art 2216-2225. not less than 10% of value of property
finality of this Decision.Torts and Damages
Refer to Eastern Shipping.5M. A penalty of six percent (6%) per annum of the amount due and unpaid must also be imposed computed from the date of demand (in this case on March 9. also earns interest. from the date of execution until 20 thil lozada
The parties foresaw that it might be difficult to ascertain the exact amount of damages for nondelivery of the sulphur. The checks were altered and first Jazmin were sued for estafa. but having been accommodated as a first class passenger in Manila. Pangasinan.5% in case of default and acceleration clause.The actual physical. C was entitled to believe that such was a confirmation of his reservation and he would be kept on the position. w/c does not exempt seller from liquidated damages. Northwest Airlines v Cuenca – Cuenca official delegate of Philippines.Torts and Damages certainty. 2 dollar checks was deposited by Jasmin residing in Maranilla st. and oppressive manner. temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or compensatory damages in instances where the injury is chronic and continuing. The reason is that these damages cover two distinct phases. then he may not likewise be entitled to exemplary damages. with full knowledge that he was an official delegate of Philippines. Namerco filed a surety bond of 45k. At any rate. Napocor v National Merchandising Corp – NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. they happened after the filing of the complaint with constabulary authorities.
Go v IAC – Jazmin is a retired employee of US Fed Govt residing in 34 Maravilla St. It also stipulated that the non-availability of vessel does not constitute as a fortuitous event. he was transferred to tourist class compartment. He was rudely compelled. No right to claim for moral damages. Go’s negligence in fact led to swindling if his employer. Temperate damages – 1. Where liquidated damages are agreed upon the same should be enforced instead of awarding only nominal damages. NY firm does not want to include the provision of nonavailability of vessel but Namerco still signed the contract. considering that the said agent had acted in
21 thil lozada
. Petitioners’ negligence was the root of all the inconvenience and embarrassment experienced by the respondent. the plant stopped the production of sulphur. However. the award for nominal damages is justified. Nominal damages are damages in name only or are in fact the same as no damages. They are not intended for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded. The respondent suffered not only actual damages but also humiliation and mental anguish over the unwarranted confiscation of the vehicle he cherished and for which he had already made substantial payments. These are damages recoverable where a legal right is technically violated and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any kind. Even the temperate damages herein awarded would be inadequate if petitioner's condition remains unchanged for the next ten years. emotional and financial cost of the care of petitioner would be virtually impossible to quantify. no incompatibility arises when both actual and temperate damages are provided for. In other words. On arrival in Okinawa. the sum awarded by CFI as moral damages may well be considered as nominal. The sulphur was failed to be delivered because of no available vessel
and subsequently. or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown. It would not be correct to hold in this case that the NPC suffered damages in name only or that breach of contract was merely technical in character. SC: 20k nominal damages Nominal damages cannot co-exist with compensatory damages. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of delay in delivery. in this case. Petitioner deliberately submitted false statement of accounts. reckless. And because of the unique nature of such cases.5M Moral damages – 2M . found to have omitted a number of payments for which E produced the corresponding receipts. in front of other passengers. Cuenca has a “wait-listed” ticket. Nominal damages – 3K. C sued for 50k exemplary. Since the agent acted in wanton. Nominal and exemplary damages should be awarded to respondent because of thoughtless. 20K moral damages. to move or be left behind in case of noncompliance. NPC sued Namerco & surety. FNBC Finance v Estavillo – E bought a Ford Fiera and made a promissory note for payment of balance and penalty of 2. no award for moral or exemplary damages was given to Nicolas Cuenca. Art 2221. As such. if not malicious acts of the petitioner. Mangatarem. boarded place of petitioner bound for Tokyo as a first class passenger. True. He had no choice but to obey. His vehicle was seized for being in arrears but claims on time.
C claims sold to buyer who also sold it to another.317. S cancelled contract & sought to recover $97. Art 2224 Moral 50k – it is mandatory in cases of murder and homicide without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. Medina v Cresencio – jeep smashed in Meralco post. Where damages sought to be recovered are only speculative and uncertain. Filipino corporation. the award of nominal damages is unnecessary and improper. ordered from Ssangyong. Nominal damages -200K. Ingal v People – 19 year old was stabbed in a carinderia. On return trip. When they were bumped off rudely is a clear indicia of malice and bad faith and establish that respondents committed a breach of contract. Plaintiffs do not appear entitled to actual or compensatory damages but only to nominal damages. The steel items indicated in sales contract with Korean corporation are different in all respects from the items ordered by petitioner MCC. exemplary 10K. Actual damages not proven. Purpose: vindicate or recognize a right that has been violated. CFI: compensatory-6K. Heirs filed separate civil action against wife of driver and registered owner. Through practice. But found out that there are many co-owners in such school that has not consented the sale. Where the court has already awarded compensatory and exemplary damages that are in themselves a judicial recognition that plaintiff’s right was violated. resulted in death of Medina as passenger. Nominal damages cannot co-exist with actual or compensatory damages. Moral damages – 100k each. interests and charges). said award may also be considered as one of exemplary damages. atty’s fee 5K. award of nominal damages in their favor precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages.300. nominal 10K. they were rudely informed that the flight was already taking off. S asked several times for the opening but to no avail. even in size and quantity. Nominal damages cannot exist with compensatory damages. Temperate 25K – proper in homicide or murder cases when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court. Nominal damages are ‘recoverable where a legal right is technically violated and must b e vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any king or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown. the RTC ruling out the claim for moral damages to the corporation also rules out any award from such nominal and exemplary damages to the stockholders. Actual damages – 1. Nominal and exemplary damages not awarded to stockholders already represented by the corporation. Nominal damages – 200 – not for indemnification of loss suffered by them but for the vindication of their right violated. Armovit and family planned to spend Christmas in Phils. it will be delivered after opening of LC but MMC only got half the amount of LC. They were delayed for a day. in order to preclude further contest thereon. and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. Petitioner knowingly breached its contractual obligation and obstinately refused to pay despite repeated demands from respondent.37 (losses from warehousing expenses. 220MT stainless steel in Korea. Cresencia. Bongal v Ensoy – B sued for damages against their counsel Atty E because of negligence in failure to allege the existence of improvement in the contested land and failed to remit docket fee and estimated cost of printing the record on appeal within the prescribed period upon perfection of appeal. MCC Industrial Sales Corp v Ssangyong Corp – MMC. moral 30K. Mindanao Academy v Yap – Nuqui and son sold land with 2 schools (Mindanao Academy and Misamis Academy) to Yap. Armovit v CA – Dr. They sued for annulment of such. which was the proper party plaintiff. they kept it in warehouse. the sales agent wrote in the ticket the time of their departure on 1030am. Where the interests of the stockholders were already represented by the corporation itself. no more than nominal damages can be awarded. Even asked for several extensions.Torts and Damages
the manner described above. Yap took possession and renamed it to Harvardian Colleges. S ordered & paid in full the steel from POSCO. and no cause of action accruing to them separately from the corporation is alleged in the complaint. But upon arrival on 915am.
22 thil lozada
. But C is still the registeres owner/operator in the Motor Vehicles Office and Public Service Commission.
from the nature of the case. distinct proof thereof. in such case. Art 2217. SSS v CA – Cruz applied for loan in SSS. definite proof of pecuniary loss cannot be offered. He experience twice that he issued a check but was dishonoured and stamped “Account Closed. “besmirched reputation” The basis of moral damages was the damage itself to his reputation as an established and well known international trader. Its attention was called to the error. Any adverse reflection thereon constitutes some material loss to him. the latter should have a right of redress particularly when it arises from a purely private and contractual relationship between said individual and the System. No moral and temperate damages. though he cannot. V’s cause of action for moral damages is not predicated upon any of those specifically enumerated in Art 2217. according to the circumstances of the case. no notice that there is no delay in payment but in second and third. The assessment of nominal damages is left to the discretion of the court. it was not an assurance that the appellant would succeed in recovering the amount claimed in this complaint. furnish independent. Nominal damages of 100 must be discarded for the grant of actual necessarily must exclude any nominal. He maintains a dollar current account with the respondent. Rafols v Batangas Transpo – Rafols boarded a bus but fell into a ravine and sustained injuries. and placed reliance on the automatic acceleration clause in the contract. Nominal 200. 2220 He is not entitled to actual damages but has been awarded nominal damages by trial court. their residential lot was made a collateral. without redress from the defendant’s wrongful act. The filing alone of the foreclosure application should not be a ground for an award of moral damages in the same way that a clearly unfounded civil action is not among the grounds for moral damages . Nominal damages by their very nature are small sums fixed by the court without regard to the extent of the harm done to the injured party. Cruz. Nominal damages – 3K – clear negligence on the part of SSS when they mistook the loan account of Socorro J. The judge should be empowered to calculate moderate damages in such cases. There are cases where from the nature of the case.Torts and Damages
Ventanilla v Centeno – Atty Centeno failed to pay the cash appeal bond by client Ventilla in the case for recovery of 4k. Temperate damages – customer’s check can be wrongfully refused payment without some impeachment of h is credit. On first publication. the assessment of damages being left to the discretion of the court according to the circumstances of the case. which must in fact be an actual injury. as necessary implication of Art 2221. injury to one’s commercial credit or to the goodwill of a business firm is often hard to show with certainty in terms of money. Notice of foreclosure was published thrice. such award precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages. It was found that M’s lot was included among the properties of corporation mortgaged to GSIS to secure obligation of P10M. The SSS was of the belief that it was acting in the legitimate exercise of its right under the mortgage contract in the face of irregular payments made by respondents. They paid monthly but only with slight delay. but it adamantly refused to acknowledge its mistake. and that even if the appeal in Civil Case No 18833 had been duly perfected. although actual or compensatory damages are not proven. On the first error. there was. although the court is convinced that there has been such loss. rather than that the plaintiff should suffer. Robes Francisco Realty & Dev Corp v CFI of Rizal – Robes sold to Millian a 276sqm lot. M fully paid the price but Robes failed to execute final deed of sale and issuance of TCT. the grant of nominal being the same as though there had been in fact no damages. 2219. the bank apologized and promised not to happen again. the law presumes a damage. it being a significant part of the foundation of his business. Araneta v Bank of America – Araneta engaged in import and export business. M sued. Considering it is not for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded. 2k nominal is excessive. For instance.” eventhough the account has sufficient amount. nominal damage is a substantial claim. The right of the vendee to acquire title to the lot bought by her was violated by petitioner and this entitles her at the very least to nominal damages. Nominal 10k. since nominal is given only if there is no proof of actual. They are recoverable where some injury has been done the amount of which the evidence fails to show. Cruz for that of private respondent Socorro C. An injustice is not perpetrated and that when damage is caused a citizen. if based upon the violation of a legal right. in truth nominal damages
23 thil lozada
. The financial credit of a businessman is a prized and valuable asset.
oppressive. to the probable profits of the business. malevolent conduct. Northwest case v Medina case . unless it is alleged and established that the writ was maliciously sued out. San Miguel Brewery v Magno – Butuan City passed an Ordinance 11 imposing 2% tax on gross sales receipts on all
24 thil lozada
. 2217) and its causal relation to defendant's acts.024 chicken eggs. They are partners in buying and selling such. Malice is an essential ingredient.000. had been retained by the provincial sheriff for a period of 38 days. malice. Her husband sued the defendant for damages. moral. the amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the court (Art. Soberano v Manila Railroad – Soberano boarded BAL. damages must be compensatory merely. and are allowed. While no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded. are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. or in case of closing business. or bad faith ." while in the case of Commissioner Cuenca.” In case of physical injuries. After a year. The bus hit a stone embankment which resulted to S’s serious physical injuries and los of his 3. and that he has the right to avail of the right to repurchase. or bad faith must be proved to support a claim for moral damages if only physical injuries are sustained. to “negligence so gross as to amount to malice. A Taiwan log importer charged C with cancellation fee of a chartered and LC extension fee for failure to deliver. Lazatin v Twano – Lazatin sued Twano for price of 225 autotrucks purchased from the US government. Consolidated Plywood Industries v CA – Consolidated verbally agreed with Kho that Kho would overhaul the logs of Consolidated from the concession area to the logpond.00 as moral damages and P10. it is. the P10. There was substantial compliance by Kho’s obligation in teh contract.Torts and Damages
are damages in name only and not in fact. not as an equivalent of a wrong inflicted. (3) malicious prosecution . Art. The terms “fraud” or “in bad faith” have reference to “wanton.00 award for nominal damages was eliminated principally because the aggrieved party had already been awarded P6. P30. for in the latter.00 as exemplary damages. fraud. Where there is no issue of malice. Hauling agreement had no fixed date of termination. His remaining balance owin gin bank was only 30K out of 180k. De la Torre claims that his father is still alive. .” or. and "nominal damages cannot coexist with compensatory damages.in Northwest Airlines. Enervida v de la Torre – Enervida filed a complaint to annul the sale made by his father to De la Torre alleging that the sale was done with the prohibitive period of 5 years under the Homestead Patent. and confined to the actual loss from deprivation of the property attached or injury to it. no such compensatory.00 as compensatory damages. Article 2219 provides that moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases . subsidiary of MRR. The action to recover damages from the attachment plaintiff. Moral damages cannot be recovered against the employer in actions based on a breach of contract of carriage in the absence of malice. 2216). . moral damages are recoverable only by the party injured and not by his next of kin. unless there is express statutory provision to the contrary. or exemplary damages were granted to the latter. Moral damages 50k. but we do not think the Code intended" a clearly unfounded civil action or proceedings" to be one of these analogous cases wherein moral damages may be recovered.000. there is no conflict between that case and Medina. Khos withdrew all its trucks which violated the terms of their agreement. C would provide verbal assistance to 180K for the cost of repairs and re-conditioning of trucks.000. nevertheless. in the very least. reckless. but simply in recognition of the existence of a technical injury.000. Negligence of driver does not per se justify an inference of malice or bad faith on the part of the company. All of which go to show that the attachment defendant is not entitled to moral damages. Fraud. No moral damages can be inferred from the mere fact that the redemption price to which defendants were entitled. though incapable of pecuniary estimation. during the time of its stoppage. essential that the claimant satisfactorily prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage (Art. for the wrongful issuance and levy of an attachment (malicious attachment) is identical or is analogous to the ordinary action for malicious prosecution. 200k is excessive. This is so because moral damages. 2219 also provides that moral damages may be awarded in "analogous cases" to those enumerated.
FEMSCO submitted a performance bond. A corporation may have a good reputation which. serious anxiety. The Sheriff was sued in its private capacity. M requested the suspension of foreclosure of the chattel mortgage. there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering. Article 2219(7) does not qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or juridical person. But in such a case. only to be cancelled later. No moral damages. and whatever adverse effects of the foreclosure could have upon its reputation or business standing would undoubtedly be the same whether the sale was conducted in Manila or Camarines Norte. Therefore. not to enrich recipient.500 was released. It is essential to prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage and its causal relation to petitioner's acts. PNB claims that there is still a balance. An artificial person like Mambulao cannot experience physical sufferings. Meralco found out that the meter in DCIM was tampered and was asked to pay the differential in electricity bill. The proceeds is 56. however. fixing a tax of P. M deposited 738. designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. Meralco v TEAM Electronics Corp – Meralco agreed to supply electricity to the 2 building of TEAM: DCIM Bldg. resulting in its humiliation in the business realm. 110 and warned that in case of non-payment. But City treasurer demand payment of tax according to Or.
25 thil lozada
. and was granted. Where the broadcast is libelous per se. not being a natural person. In such a case. Filipinas Broadcasting Network v Ago-Medical & Educ Center – “Expose” is radio program hosted by Algre and Rima wherein they commented that Ago is a dumping ground of moral and physical misfits.Torts and Damages
alcoholic or malt beverages. The same cannot be considered in this case. a corporation is not entitled to moral damages because. and NS Bldg.500 and 15. the project was granted to FEMSCO. reduced from 2M. TEAM asked Ultra to pay but refused. It was amended by Ordinance 110. the sale of the land was done. and was again reconnected. mental anguish and moral shock. fright.59 which represents payment of the its whole debt. M failed to pay and the sheriff flied a notice of foreclosure mortgaged land and the chattel mortgage. Moral damages. Only 27. Moral damages may be awarded. wounded feelings. may also be a ground for the award of moral damages. a juridical person such as a corporation can validly complain for libel or any other form of defamation and claim for moral damages. Its electricity was disconnected but TEAM filed a complaint in RTC. the law implies damages. However. DCIM was leased to Ultra but ejected because of violations in the contract. (see joint tortfeasor discussion) Jardine Davies v CA – Purefoods conducted a bidding for the supply and installation of generators in its plant. Moral damages 150K not 300k. evidence of an honest mistake or the want of character or reputation of the party libeled goes only in mitigation of damages. the properties will be levied.908. mental anguish. Ago sued for malicious imputations and damages. FEMSCO sued Purefoods for breach of contract and Jardine for interefence of contractual relations. if besmirched. it cannot experience physical suffering or sentiments like wounded feelings. 2 trucks was seized. fright and the like. Moral damages of 1M. Neither in such a case is the plaintiff required to introduce evidence of actual damages as a condition precedent to the recovery of some damages. Nominal damages 100 Mambulao Lumber v PNB – Mambulao Lumber granted industrial loan of 100k by PNB. are in the category of an award. greedy for moeny and that its Physical Therapy course is not recognized by DECS. As a rule. Ago did not suffered substantial damage. San Miguel was religious is paying tax based on Ordinance 11. even the NS Bldg. it is imperative for the claimant to present proof to justify the award. Out of 3 bidders. Purefoods unilaterally cancelled the award and granted to Jardine (not participated in bidding). serious anxiety. mental anguish. The only exception to this rule is when the corporation has a reputation that is debased. Meralco inspected and found out that it was again tampered. though incapable of pecuniary estimation. Mambulao had already ceased operations at the time of foreclosure sales. FEMSCO’s reputation was tarnished after it immediately ordered equipment from its suppliers on account of the urgency of the project.25 per case on sale of beer. moral shock or social humiliation which are basis of moral damages.
Documents Similar To Torts-second Half Cases (1)Skip carouselFIDICPractical CompletionRevised EOT in PAM 2006 vs 1998Ice Examiners Report 2009Extensions of Time and Liquidated DamagesCostello Construction v. J.D. Long Masonry, 4th Cir. (2007)BLACKLISTED DEVELOPER IN MALAYSIADelay Damages - Designing BuildingsDemo Moot ProblemJana Chaitanya Housing Consumer Court JudgmentsOil.docx Judgment.....Sbi 2000Victory Liner v. Gammad, GR No. 15963606. Victory Liner vs. GammadFull Text Part 2 DAMAGESDamages Cases187-1945 Simex v. CAAquarium LawsuitSupreme Double Rod Garment Rack100217 Memo in Supp Mtn for Award of Prejudgment Interest GTLLindsay Lohan Maserati LawsuitMichael Anthony Stamathis v. Flying J, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation David L. Hansen, 389 F.3d 429, 4th Cir. (2004)5.i.3 Abs-cbn v. CAAurora Theater Shooting Complaint NowlanJames Holmes Case07 Inchausti vs Song FoDitto v. McCurdy, 86 Haw. 84 (Haw. 1997)James K. Lee v. Michael Edwards, 101 F.3d 805, 2d Cir. (1996)KindsofNon-PerformancePt2Feb22chilldreleaseDocuments About Liquidated DamagesSkip carouselPerformance BondSpeedee v. the Weinstein Co.KGM Custom Home Builders v. Prosky (MA SJC 5/30/14)Breach of Contract and Its CompensationNegotiating IT ContractsPadMapper Cease And DesistUnited States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of California Chambers, 22ndIn Re Trans World Airlines, Incorporated, Debtor. Interface Group-Nevada, Incorporated v. Trans World Airlines, Incorporated. Thomas E. Ross, Trustee. In Re Trans World Airlines, Incorporated, Debtor. Interface Group-Nevada, Incorporated v. Trans World Airlines, Incorporated, Thomas E. Ross, Trustee, 145 F.3d 124, 3rd Cir. (1998)Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'Neil, 324 U.S. 697 (1945)James Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank & Trust, 421 F.3d 1209, 11th Cir. (2005)Mark Snyder contractRobinson v. United States, 261 U.S. 486 (1923)Kothe v. RC Taylor Trust, 280 U.S. 224 (1930)Irving Trust Co. v. AW Perry, Inc., 293 U.S. 307 (1934)Six Companies of California V, 311 U.S. 180 (1941)United States v. Rice, 317 U.S. 61 (1942)United States v. Brooks-Callaway Co., 318 U.S. 120 (1943)United States v. American Surety Co., 322 U.S. 96 (1944)Priebe & Sons, Inc. v. United States, 332 U.S. 407 (1947)Unexcelled Chemical Corp. v. United States, 345 U.S. 59 (1953)Rex Trailer Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 148 (1956)ICC v. Transcon Lines, 513 U.S. 138 (1995)Commissioner v. Schleier, 515 U.S. 323 (1995)Bignall v. Gould, 119 U.S. 495 (1886)Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. Moore, 183 U.S. 642 (1902)United States v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 205 U.S. 105 (1907)William Cramp & Sons Ship & Engine Building Co. v. United States, 216 U.S. 494 (1910)Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Tucker, 230 U.S. 340 (1913)United States v. United Engineering & Contracting Co., 234 U.S. 236 (1914)Maryland Steel Co. of Baltimore Cty. v. United States, 235 U.S. 451 (1915)More From Jamie TiuSkip carousel20140218-Q-and-A-on-the-Handbook-on-Workers-Statutory-Monetary-Benefits.pdfstarpapervssimbol.pdfCases Part 1PartnershipCases-Partnership and Agency86762509 Partnership Cases Part1Cases-Partnership and Agency132042249 San Beda Partnership33685015 Partnership and Agency Digests for Atty Cochingyan61788747 Memorandum WritingWriting Trial Memorandum and Legal Opinion55001617 Legal Memorandum SampleReply to Counter Affidavit61568099 Writ of Habeas Corpus and Writ of AmparoSec Cert - For CorporationsUtopia ConstiPIL+Reviewer+Draft+(Jan27)Sec Cert - For CorporationsMotion to Release Cash Bail Bond74471433 NLRC Position Paper Reyes74471433 NLRC Position Paper Reyes60694875 Special Proceedings60694875 Special ProceedingsRemedial Law ReviewRemedial Law ReviewPetition vs Signature Verification38739142 Legal Medicine111740841 Torts Digests Beda Alabang88860310 Joint Affidavit of Two Disinterested Persons