Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Session 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 attorneys 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
2 thil lozada
3 thil lozada
4 thil lozada
5 thil lozada
6 thil lozada
7 thil lozada
8 thil lozada
Session 12 Art 1169, 1175, 1226-1230, 1956, 1959-1961, 2209-2213, 2226-2228, CB Circular Nos. 416 and 905, Cases 201-223, 230 NPC v National Merchandising Corp NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of
9 thil lozada
10 thil lozada
11 thil lozada
12 thil lozada
13 thil lozada
1.
the civil indemnity to P16k = unpaid interest on P200k loan at 12% per annum as of Feb 2, 1999 ( date of the check), 2. 12% interest per annum from April 29, 1999 (date of judicial demand, i.e., date of filing of information up to finality of judgment). 3. 12% interest per annum on total amount after judgment becomes final and executory until obligation is satisfied. Zobel v City of Manila City of Manila wanted to establish a cemetery, 25 hec lot of Zobel minors was bought for such purpose. Manila passed an ordinance for appropriation for such. Found overpricing, as such, it was not paid. Contract contains that 1st instalment was not to bear interest but next 5 instalments were to bear 5% interest per annum. As to 1st instalment. The stipulation that it would draw no interest was made in the expectation that the obligation would be paid upon date stipulated. 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. After default, it is to be treated as if nothing had been said about interest at all. Sec 510 of CIvPro interest thus accruing must be consolidated with the principal as of the date of the judgment of the lower court; after which interest upon the whole shall be computed at the same rate. Applicable only to debts and claims with respect to which no stipulation for interest has been made As to succeeding instalments, Art 1109. interest accrued up to the date of filing of complaint must be consolidated as of that date with the capital, after which the whole shall bear interest at the contract rate of 5% per annum until paid. 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. Applicable only to obligations containing stipulation for interest. A demand established by judgment must be understood as bearing interest whether expressly so stated or not. A municipal corporation does not enjoy immunity from liability for interest, when assessed as damages for the non-payment of a debt, to the same extent as the general government.
are contra bonos mores, if not against the law, they are inexistent and void from the beginning. The interest rate of 10% monthly is clearly excessive, iniquitous and unconscionable. The Court deems in fair to adjust:
14 thil lozada
15 thil lozada
16 thil lozada
Torts and Damages 1. The cases discussed can be classified into 2 groups according to similarity of issues involved and the
corresponding rulings rendered by the court 2. First group - 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. 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, goods or credits, as well as to judgments involving such loan or forbearance of money, goods or credits, 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. Observe, too, that in these cases, a common time frame in the computation of the 6% interest per annum has been applied, i.e., from the time the complaint is filed until the adjudged amount is fully paid. 3. Second group - did not alter the pronounced rule on the application of the 6% or 12% interest per annum, 17 depending on whether or not the amount involved is a loan or forbearance, on the one hand, or one of indemnity for damage, on the other hand. Unlike, however, 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, the "second group" varied on the commencement of the running of the legal interest. Malayan held that the amount awarded should bear legal interest from the date of the decision of the court a quo, explaining that "if the suit were for damages, 'unliquidated and not known until definitely ascertained, assessed and determined by the courts after proof,' then, interest 'should be from the date of the decision.'" American Express International v. IAC, introduced a different time frame for reckoning the 6% interest by ordering it to be "computed from the finality of (the) decision until paid ." 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. 4. Rule of thumb for future guidance
I. When an obligation, regardless of its source, i.e., law, contracts, quasi-contracts, delicts or quasi-delicts is breached, the contravenor can be held liable for damages. The provisions under Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining the measure of recoverable damages. II. With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory damages, the rate of interest, as well as the accrual thereof, is imposed, as follows: 1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing. Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 12% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code. 2. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of money, is breached, an interest on the amount of damages awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand can be established with reasonable certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is established with reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. 1169, Civil Code) but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the time the demand is made, 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 actual base for the computation of legal interest shall, in any case, be on the amount finally adjudged. 3. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest, whether the case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, above, shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction, this interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a forbearance of credit. Escani v Ortigas Jr Falcon Corp consists of 2 groups of stockholder in the case at bar. 1 st, scholey, ortigas, inductive. 2 nd:
17 thil lozada
18 thil lozada
19 thil lozada
finality of this Decision. 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, 1982), until finality of Judgment. The interest of 16% percent per annum, as long as unpaid, also earns interest, computed from the date of the filing of the complaint (March 12, 1982) until finality of this Courts Decision. From such date of finality, the total unpaid amount (principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on the interest) computed shall earn interest of 12% per annum until satisfied.
1wphi1.
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE = principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on interest Interest = principal x 16 % per annum x no. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Service charge = principal x 2% per annum x no. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Penalty = principal x 6% per annum x no. of years from demand (March 9, 1982) until finality of judgment Interest on interest = Interest computed as of the filing of the complaint (March 12, 1982) x 12% x no. of years until finality of judgment Attorneys 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. Session 14 Art 2216-2225, Cases 69 (321 scra 584), 96, 201, 239, 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, from the date of execution until 20 thil lozada
awarded, if they are to adequately and correctly respond to the injury caused: 1. compensates for pecuniary loss incurred and proved, up to the time of trial; 2. meet pecuniary loss certain to be suffered but which could not, from the nature of the case, be made with
Torts and Damages certainty. In other words, temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or compensatory damages in instances where the injury is chronic and continuing. And because of the unique nature of such cases, no incompatibility arises when both actual and temperate damages are provided for. The reason is that these damages cover two distinct phases. Temperate damages 1.5M Moral damages 2M - The actual physical, emotional and financial cost of the care of petitioner would be virtually impossible to quantify. Even the temperate damages herein awarded would be inadequate if petitioner's condition remains unchanged for the next ten years.
Go v IAC Jazmin is a retired employee of US Fed Govt residing in 34 Maravilla St, Mangatarem, Pangasinan. 2 dollar checks was deposited by Jasmin residing in Maranilla st. The checks were altered and first Jazmin were sued for estafa. Nominal damages 3K. Art 2221. 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, or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown. They are not intended for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded. No right to claim for moral damages, then he may not likewise be entitled to exemplary damages. Petitioners negligence was the root of all the inconvenience and embarrassment experienced by the respondent, they happened after the filing of the complaint with constabulary authorities. Gos negligence in fact led to swindling if his employer. Napocor v National Merchandising Corp NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of delay in delivery. It also stipulated that the non-availability of vessel does not constitute as a fortuitous event, w/c does not exempt seller from liquidated damages. Namerco filed a surety bond of 45k. NY firm does not want to include the provision of nonavailability of vessel but Namerco still signed the contract. The sulphur was failed to be delivered because of no available vessel
and subsequently, the plant stopped the production of sulphur. NPC sued Namerco & surety. Where liquidated damages are agreed upon the same should be enforced instead of awarding only nominal damages. The parties foresaw that it might be difficult to ascertain the exact amount of damages for nondelivery of the sulphur. Nominal damages are damages in name only or are in fact the same as no damages. 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. FNBC Finance v Estavillo E bought a Ford Fiera and made a promissory note for payment of balance and penalty of 2.5% in case of default and acceleration clause. His vehicle was seized for being in arrears but claims on time. Nominal and exemplary damages should be awarded to respondent because of thoughtless, if not malicious acts of the petitioner. 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. Petitioner deliberately submitted false statement of accounts, found to have omitted a number of payments for which E produced the corresponding receipts. Northwest Airlines v Cuenca Cuenca official delegate of Philippines, boarded place of petitioner bound for Tokyo as a first class passenger. On arrival in Okinawa, he was transferred to tourist class compartment. He was rudely compelled, in front of other passengers, to move or be left behind in case of noncompliance. He had no choice but to obey. C sued for 50k exemplary, 20K moral damages. SC: 20k nominal damages Nominal damages cannot co-exist with compensatory damages. However, in this case, no award for moral or exemplary damages was given to Nicolas Cuenca. As such, the award for nominal damages is justified. True, Cuenca has a wait-listed ticket, but having been accommodated as a first class passenger in Manila, C was entitled to believe that such was a confirmation of his reservation and he would be kept on the position. Since the agent acted in wanton, reckless, and oppressive manner, with full knowledge that he was an official delegate of Philippines, the sum awarded by CFI as moral damages may well be considered as nominal. At any rate, considering that the said agent had acted in
21 thil lozada
22 thil lozada
23 thil lozada
24 thil lozada
25 thil lozada