Persons and Family Relations  Reminder: the absence of good

faith is essential to abuse of

Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights
rights.
and in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give every one his due, and observe honesty and good Articles 19, 20 and 21, Compared
faith.
 Art 19 lays down the rule of conduct for the
Art. 20. Every person who, contrary to law, willfully of government of human relations for the
negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify maintenance of social order; it does not provide
the latter for the same. a remedy for its violation.
 Art 20 speaks of the general sanction for all
Art. 21. Any person who willfully causes loss or injury other provisions of law which do not especially
to another in a manner that is contrary to moral, good provide for their own sanction.
customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for  Art 21 deals with acts contra bonus mores, and
the damage. has the following elements: (1) there is an act
Rule: Art. 19 which is legal; (2) but which is contrary to
morals, good customs, public order or public
Sanctions: Art. 20 and 21 policy; and (3) and it is done in with intent to
injure.
Principle of Damnum Absque Injuria
Breach of Promise to Marry
 Concept: this principle means that the
proper exercise of a lawful right cannot  Rule: the existing rule is that a breach of
constitute a legal wrong for which an promise to marry per se is not an actionable
action will lie, although the act may wrong. (Baksh vs. CA)
result in damage of another, for no
legal right has been invaded. Any injury Breach of Promise to Marry when actionable
or damage occasioned thereby is  If there is fraud or deceit – where a man’s
damnum absque injuria – for which the promise to marry is in fact the proximate cause
law gives no remedy. of the acceptance of his love by a woman and
Principle of Abuse of Rights his representation to fulfill that promise
thereafter becomes the proximate cause of the
 Rule: if the right is exercise in bad faith and for giving of herself unto him in a sexual congress,
the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring proof that he had, in reality, no intention of
another, there is liability under the principle of marrying her and that the promise was a subtle
abuse of rights (Albenson Enterprises Corp vs. scheme or deceptive device to entice her, could
CA), for the exercise of a right ends when the justify the award of damages pursuant to Art
right disappears and it disappears when it is 21.
abused especially to the prejudiced of others.  If expenses are actually incurred – the plaintiff
has the right to recover money or property
 Elements of Abuse of rights advanced by him upon the faith of such
promise.
o There is a legal right or duty;  When woman was forcebly abducted and raped
o It is exercised in bad faith; and
o For the sole intent of prejudicing or Malicious Prosecution
injuring another.
  One cannot be held liable in damages for WON the CA erred in awarding damages.
maliciously instituting a prosecution where he
acted with probable cause. Malice and want of RULING:
probable cause must both exist in order to Yes, the CA erred; the award for damages has no legal
justify a suit. basis. The mere fact of loss does not give rise to a right
to recover damages. There must be both a right of
Requisites of Maliscious Prosecution
action for a legal wrong inflicted by the defendant and
1. the fact of the prosecution and the damage to the plaintiff resulting therefrom. Damages
further fact that the defendant himself are merely a part of the remedy allowed for the injury
was the prosecutor, and that the action cause by a breach or wrong.
was finally terminated with an
acquittal; DOCTRINE:
2. the in bringing the action the The mere fact that the plaintiff suffered losses does not
prosecutor acted without probable give rise to a right to recover damages. To warrant the
cause; and recovery of damages, there must be both a right of
3. that the prosecutor was actuated or action for a legal wrong inflicted by the defendant, and
impelled by legal malice that is damage without wrong, does not constitute a cause of
improper or sinister motive. action, since damages are merely part of the remedy
CASES: allowed for injury caused by a breach or wrong.

Damnum Absque Injuria – there is a material distinction

Custodio vs. CA
between damages and injury. INJURY is the illegal
Spouses Cristino and Brigida Custodio and Spouses Lito invasion of a legal right; DAMAGES is the loss, hurt or
and Maria Cristina Santos vs. CA, Heirs of Pacifico harm which results from the injury; and damages are
Mabasa and RTC of Pasig. the compensation awarded for the damage suffered.
Thus, there can be damage without injury to those
FACTS: instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of
Private respondent Mabasa wanted to establish an a violation of legal a legal duty.
easement of right of way going into their property
against petitioners who built an adobe wall in their
properties which thereby restricted access to the MBTC vs. Wong
Mabasa property. Petitioners claim that they built the
wall in order to protect their persons and their property FACTS:
from their intrusive neighbors. The trial court
nonetheless ordered that an easement be created.
ISSUE:
Not satisfied, Mabasa went to the CA which modified
the decision of the trial court by awarding actual
damages (P65,000,00), moral damages (P30,000,00)
and exemplary damages (P10,000,00). Damages were
based on the fact of loss in form of unrealized rentals on RULING:
the property due to the adobe wall restricting access.

ISSUE:
PE vs. PE
FACTS: BAKSH vs. CA

Alfonso Pe, a married man, was an adopted son of a FACTS:

Chinaman named Pe Becco, a collateral relative of Lolita
Pe’s father. Because of that fact and the similarity in Gashem is an Iranian citizen and an exchange student
their family name. Alfonso become close to Lolita’s taking a medical course at Lyceum Northwester
family who regarded him as a member of their family. Colleges in Dagupan City. Sometime in 1987, Gashem
Sometime in 1952, Alfonso frequented the house of courted Marilou Gonzales and proposed to marry her.
Lolita on the pretext that he wanted her to teach him Marilou accepted his love on the condition that they
would get married and they agreed to get married after
how to pray the rosary. The two eventually fell in love
with each other and conducted clandestine trysts not the end of the semester, which was in October 1987.
only in the tow of Gasan but also in Boac where Lolita Gashem then visited Marilou’s parents in Banaga,
used to teach in a barrio school. They exchanged love Bugallon, Pangasinan to secure their approval.
notes. The rumors about their love affair reached the Sometime in August 1987, Gashem forced Marilou to
ears of Lolita’s parents sometime in 1957, Alfonso was live with him in the Lozano Apartments. She was a virgin
before she began living with him. Soon, Gashem’s
forbidden from going to their house and from further
seeing Lolita. The affair continued nonetheless. On day attitude towards Marilou stated to change. He
in 1957, Alfonso wrote Lolita a note asking her to have a maltreated her and threatened to kill her as a result of
date with him. When Lolita want to see him, the two such maltreatment, she sustained injuries. At the
decided to elope and Lolita never return. The parents, confrontation before the representative of the
brothers and sisters of Lolita sued alfonso for damages barangay, Gashem repudiated their marriage
agreement because he was already married to someone
under Art 21 of the CC.
living in Bacolod. Marilou thus filed a complaint for
ISSUE: damages against Gashem.

WON the defendant committed injury to Lolita’s family ISSUE:

in a manner contrary to morals, good customs and
WON the respondent could claim payment for the
public policy as contemplated in Art 21 of the NCC.
damages incurred by the petitioner.
RULING:
RULING:
Alfonso is liable for damages. The circumstances under
which Alfonso tried to win Lolita’s affection cannot lead Gashem is liable for damages. The Supreme Court ruled
to any other conclusion than it was he who, thru an that where a man’s promise to marry is in fact the
ingenious scheme or trickery, seduced the latter to the proximate cause of the acceptance of his love by a
extent of making her fall in love with him. No other woman and his representation to fulfill that promise
thereafter becomes the proximate cause of the giving of
conclusion can be drawn from the chain of events than
that defendant not only deliberately, but through a herself unto him in a sexual congress proof that he had,
clever strategy, succeed in winning the affection and in reality, no intention of marrying her and that the
love of Lolita to the extent of having illicit relations with promise was only a subtle scheme or deceptive device
her. The wrong he has caused her and her family is to entice her consent to the sexual act, could justify the
indeed immeasurable considering the fat that he is award of damages pursuant to Art 21 not because of
married man. Verily, he has committed an injury to such promise to marry but because of the fraud and
Lolita’s family in a manner contrary to morals, good deceit behind it and the willful injury to her honor and
customs and public policy. reputation which followed thereafter.

TANJANCO vs. CA
FACTS: However, the court did not find this defense
meritorious because even though it is true that there is
About December 1997, Apolonio courted Araceli both no law for breach of promise to marry, Wassmer still
of adult age. That Apolonio expressed his undying love suffered frustration and public humiliation.
and affection to Araceli also in due time reciprocated
the tender feelings, in consideration of Apolonio ISSUE:
promise of marriage Araceli consented and acceded to
Apolonio’s pleas for carnal knowledge. Until December WON the court err in ordering the defendant to pay
1959, through his protestations of love and promises of plaintiff moral damages?
marriage, defendant succeeded in having carnal access RULING:
to plaintiff, as a result of which the latter conceived a
child. Araceli informed Apolonio and pleaded with him The case at bar is not a mere breach of promise to
to make good his promises of marriage but instead of marry because it is not considered an actionable wrong.
honoring his promises and righting his wrong, Apolonio The mere fact the couple have already filed a marriage
stopped and refrained from seeing Araceli since about license and already spent for invitations,
July 1959 has not visited her and to all intents and wedding apparels, gives the plaintiff reason to demand
purposes has broken their engagement and his promise. for payment of damages. The court affirmed the
previous judgment and ordered the defendant to pay
ISSUE: the plaintiff moral damages for the humiliation she
WON Whether or not the acts of petitioner constitute suffered; actual damages for the expenses incurred and
seduction as contemplated in Art. 21. exemplary damages because the defendant acted
fraudulently in making the plaintiff believe that he will
RULING: come back and the wedding will push through.

No, it is not. Seduction is more than mere sexual

intercourse or a breach of promise to marry. It connotes HERMOSISIMA vs. CA
essentially the idea of deceit, enticement superior
power or abuse of confidence on the part of the FACTS:
seducer to which the woman has yielded. In this case,
for 1 whole year, the woman maintained intimate The complainant Soledad Cagigas is thirty six years old,
sexual relations with the defendant, and such conduct is a former high school teacher and a life insurance agent.
incompatible with the idea of seduction. Plainly here The petitioner Francisco Hermosisima is ten years
there is voluntariness and mutual passion, for had the younger than complainant, and an apprentice pilot.
plaintiff been deceived, she would not have again Intimacy developed between them and thus sometime
yielded to his embraces for a year. 1953 after coming from the movies, they had sexual
intercourse in his cabin. In February 1954, the woman
WASSMER vs. VELEZ advised the man that she is pregnant whereupon the
man promised to marry her. Their
FACTS:
daughter Chris Hermosisima was born June 1954 in a
Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer planned to get private clinic. However, subsequently the man married
married. However, Velez went away and Beatriz did not one Romanita Perez. Hence, Soledad filed a complaint
hear from him again. Beatriz sued Francisco against Francisco for acknowledgement of her child as a
and asked the latter to pay her moral damages. Velez natural child of the petitioner, as well as for support of
contended that there is no provision of the law said child and moral damages for alleged breach of
authorizing an action for breach of promise to marry. promise to marry. The CFI declared the child a natural
daughter of the defendant, ordered Francisco to 2. Plaintiff has suffered a loss;
support the child by giving a monthly alimony, awarded 3. Enrichment of the defendant is without
actual damages and moral damages. On appeal of the just or legal ground; and
petitioner, the CA affirmed the assailed decision 4. Plaintiff has no other action based on
however increased the amount for actual and moral contract, quasi contract, crime or quasi
damages. delict.

ISSUE: Art. 100, RPC

Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. Every person

Whether or not the award for moral damages is valid.
criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
RULING:

The Supreme Court held that no moral damages can be BANAL vs. TADEO
had in the instant case because it was the woman who
FACTS:
virtually seduced the man by surrendering herself to
him because she a girl ten years older was Fifteen informations for violation of BP 22 were filed
overwhelmed by her love for him, she wanted to bind against Rosario Claudio before the RTC of Quezon City
him by having a fruit of their engagement even before assigned to Branch 84. The judge of said branch
they had the benefit of clergy. inhibited himself, and was re-raffled to Branch 105
presided by Judge Serquina. Judge Tadeo then replaced
Art. 22. Every person who through an act of Judge Serquina. On 08 January 1987, the RTC issued an
performance by another, or any other means, acquires order rejecting the appearance of Atty. Nicolito Bustos
or comes into possession of something at the expense as private prosecutor on the ground that the charge
of the latter without just or legal ground, shall return
does not provide for any civil liability or indemnity.
the same to him. Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the
Art. 23. Even when an act or event causing damage to order. Respondent Claudio filed her opposition to the
another’s property was not due to the fault or motion. The court denied petitioner’s motion for
negligence of the defendant, the latter shall be liable reconsideration. Hence, this petition for certiorari.
for indemnity if through the act or event he was
ISSUES:
benefited.
WON the respondent court acted with grave abuse of
Accion In Rem Verso discretion in rejecting the appearance of a private
 Concept – an action for recovery of what has prosecutor.
been paid or delivered without just cause or
RULING:
legal ground. The purpose of the action is to
prevent unjust enrichment, which exists when a YES. Petitioner contends that every man criminally
person unjustly retains a benefit to the loss of liable is also civilly liable, and hence indemnity may be
another or when a person retains money or recovered from the offender regardless of whether or
property of another against the fundamental not BP 22 so provides. On the other hand, respondents
principles of justice, equity and good argue that BP 22 is an offense against public order and
conscience. hence, it is the State and the public that are the
 REQUISITES: principal complainants; hence, there is no civil liability.
1. Defendant has been enriched; Civil liability arises not so much because the act or
omission is a crime, but because it caused damage to It is elementary that an objection shall be made at the
another. What gives rise to the civil liability is really the time when an alleged inadmissible document is offered
obligation and the moral duty of everyone to repair or in evidence; otherwise, the objection shall be treated as
make whole the damage caused to another by reason of waived, since the right to object is merely a privilege
his own act or omission, done intentionally or which the party may waive. Thus, a failure to except to
negligently, whether or not the same be punishable by the evidence because it does not conform to the statute
law. Damage or injury to another is evidently the is a waiver of the provisions of the law. Even assuming
foundation of the civil action. Such is not the case in ex gratia argumenti that these documents are
criminal actions for, to be criminally liable, it is enough inadmissible for being hearsay, but on account of failure
that the act or omission complained of is punishable, to object thereto, the same may be admitted and
regardless of whether or not it also causes material considered as sufficient to prove the facts therein
damage to another. Regardless, therefore, of whether asserted. Hearsay evidence alone may be insufficient to
or not a special law so provides, indemnification of the establish a fact in a suit but, when no objection is made
offended party may be had on account of the damage, thereto, it is, like any other evidence, to be considered
loss or injury directly suffered as a consequence of the and given the importance it deserves.
wrongful act of another. The payee of the check is
entitled to receive the payment of money for which the In the case at bar, petitioner PRBLI did not object to the
worthless check was issued. Having been caused the TSNs containing the testimonies of respondent
damage, she is entitled to recompense. The framers of Calaunan, Marcelo Mendoza and Fernando Ramos in
the law could not have intended to leave the offended the criminal case when the same were offered in
private party defrauded and empty-handed by evidence in the trial court. In fact, the TSNs of the
excluding the civil liability of the offender. testimonies of Calaunan and Mendoza were admitted
by both petitioners. Moreover, petitioner PRBLI even
offered in evidence the TSN containing the testimony of
MANLICLIC vs. CALAUNAN Donato Ganiban in the criminal case. If petitioner PRBLI
argues that the TSNs of the testimonies of plaintiff’s
witnesses in the criminal case should not be admitted in
Admittedly, respondent failed to show the concurrence the instant case, why then did it offer the TSN of the
of all the requisites set forth by the Rules for a testimony of Ganiban which was given in the criminal
testimony given in a former case or proceeding to be case? It appears that petitioner PRBLI wants to have its
admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule. cake and eat it too. It cannot argue that the TSNs of the
Petitioner PRBLI, not being a party in Criminal Case No. testimonies of the witnesses of the adverse party in the
684-M-89, had no opportunity to cross-examine the criminal case should not be admitted and at the same
three witnesses in said case. The criminal case was filed time insist that the TSN of the testimony of the witness
exclusively against petitioner Manliclic, petitioner for the accused be admitted in its favor. To disallow
PRBLI’s employee. The cases dealing with the admission in evidence of the TSNs of the testimonies of
subsidiary liability of employers uniformly declare that, Calaunan, Marcelo Mendoza and Fernando Ramos in
strictly speaking, they are not parties to the criminal the criminal case and to admit the TSN of the testimony
cases instituted against their employees. of Ganiban would be unfair.

Notwithstanding the fact that petitioner PRBLI was not ROY PADILLA vs. CA
a party in said criminal case, the testimonies of the FACTS:
three witnesses are still admissible on the ground that
petitioner PRBLI failed to object on their admissibility. Petitioner Roy Padilla, Filomeno Galdones, Pepito
Bedena, Yolly Rico, DavidBermundo, Villanaoc, Roberto
Rosales, Villania, Garrido, Ortega jr., no duty to pay, and the person who received
Celestino,“Kamlon” and 14 Ricardo Does was the payment;
charged of Grave Coercion. On Feb 1964around 9 2. When the payment is made through mistake
am at Camarines Norte, The petitioners willfully and not through liberality or some other cause.
and feloniously prevented Antonio Vergara and his NOTE: Mistake is an essential element in
family from closing their stall at the Public Market. solutio indebiti but in accion in rem verso, it is
Petitioners forcibly opened the door of the stall and not necessary there should have been mistake
brutally demolished the stall using axes then carrying in the payment (RABUYA, 80).
away the goods and merchandise. Such acts ofthe
petitioners were said to be pursuant to an LIABILITY WITHOUT FAULT OR NEGLIGENCE
ordinance. The damage amounted to 30K for actual  Even when an act or event causing damage to
damages and 20K for exemplary damages. Roy Padilla another’s property was not due to the fault or
and company also took advantage of their public negligence of the defendant, the latter shall be
position, being the Mayor of the said municipality and liable for indemnity if through the act or event
the others being policemen. The CFI finds them guilty. he was benefited (Art. 23). Even when the event
The CA acquitted the accused but ordered them to pay producing loss to others may be accidental or
jointly and severally 9,600 as actual damages. fortuitous, so long as another person is
benefited through such event or act
ISSUE:
(TOLENTINO, 86).
WON the order of payment for damages is valid
ART. 24 In all contractual, property or other relations,
notwithstanding the acquittal of the accused.
when one of the parties is at a disadvantage on
RULING: account of his moral dependence, ignorance,
indigence, mental weakness, tender age or other
Yes it is valid. Civil liability is not extinguished where handicap, the courts must be vigilant for his
the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt that the
protection.
accused is guilty of the crime charged. No separate civil
action is necessary considering that the facts to be NOTE: Literally, parens patriae means ―father or
proved in the civil case have already been established parent of his country. The phrase refers to the
in the criminal proceeding. To require a separate civil sovereign power of the state in safeguarding the rights
action would only clod the court dockets and of persons under disability, such as the insane and the
unnecessary duplication of litigation. A separate civil incompetent (PARAS, 152).
action may be warranted where additional facts have to
be established. INTENT OF ART. 24

 The law intended to protect both those who are

Solutio Indebiti
found weak and uneducated (Id.), those at a
 If something is received when there is no right disadvantaged position by reason of moral
to demand it, and it was unduly delivered dependence, ignorance, indigence, mental
through mistake, the obligation to return it weakness, tender age and other handicap. It is
arises (Art. 2154). designed to implement the principle of parens
patriae, and the courts, as guardians of rights of
APPLICATION the people, are called upon to implement such
1. When a payment is made when there exist no policy (ALBANO, 126).
binding relation between the payor, who has
ART. 25 Thoughtless extravagances in expenses for protected, and damages are provided for
pleasure or display during a period of acute public violations of a person’s dignity, personality,
want or emergency may be stopped by order of the privacy and peace of mind. (Concepcion v CA,
courts at the instance of any government or private 324 SCRA 85, 94 [2000]).
charitable institution.
ART. 27 Any person suffering material or moral loss
THOUGHTLESS EXTRAVAGANCE because a public servant or employee refuses or
neglects, without just cause, to perform his official
 Expending for pleasure during public want or duty may file an action for damages and other relief
emergency. This may cause hatred among the
against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary
people, especially those adversely affected by administrative action that may be taken.
such emergency (Id.).
 NOTE: The duty referred to in the law must be a
REQUISITES: ministerial duty, not a discretionary function
1. There must be an acute public want or (ALBANO, 135).
emergency;  NOTE: There must be a wilful or illegal act or
2. The person seeking to stop it must be a omission by a public servant in the performance
government or private charitable of his official duty, by reason of which a person
institution. suffers either a material or a moral loss (Id.).

ART. 26 Every person shall respect the dignity, GENERAL RULE

personality, privacy and peace of mind of his  As a rule, a public officer, whether judicial, or
neighbours and other persons. The following and quasi-judicial or executive, is not personally
similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal liable to one injured in consequence of an act
offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, performed within the scope of his official
prevention and other relief: authority, and in line of his official duty.
1. Prying into the privacy of another’s residence;
EXCEPTION
2. Meddling with or disturbing the private life or
family relations of another;  Art. 27
3. Intriguing to cause another to be alienated
from his friends; SCOPE OF ART. 27
4. Vexing or humiliating another on account of  Limited to refusal or neglect to perform official
his religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place duties. Does not cover malfeasance of
of birth, physical defect, or other personal misfeasance, but only nonfeasance.
condition.
 REASON: If in legislation, inadequate regard is REQUISITES [PuV WiN]
observed for human life and safety; if the laws
A. That the defendant be a public official
do not sufficiently forestall human suffering or
charged with the performance of
do not try effectively to curb those factors or
official duties;
influences that would the noblest sentiments; if
B. That there be a violation of an official
the statutes insufficiently protect persons from
duty in favor of an individual;
being unjustly humiliated, in short, if human
C. That there be a wilfulness or negligence
personality is not properly exalted — then the
in the violation of such official duty;
laws are indeed defective. Thus, under this
article, the rights of persons are amply
 D. That there be an injury to the individual interference with the latter’s business
(TOLENTINO, 113) (Willaware Products Corp. v Jesichris
Manufacturing Corp., 734 SCRA 238 [2014]).
NEGLECT

 Implies the absence of care, prudence, and  NOTE: What is being sought to be prevented is
forethought as under circumstances duly not competition per se but the use of unjust,
required should be given or exercised (Id., 136- oppressive or high-handed methods which may
137). deprive others of a fair chance to engage in
business or to earn a living. What the law
MALFEASANCE prohibits is unfair competition and not
competition where the means used are fair and
 The unjust performance of some act which the
legitimate (Id.).
party had no right, or which he had contracted
not to do.
REQUISITES
MISFEASANCE
1. It must involve an injury to a competitor or
 Erroneous performance of a legal action, most
trade rival;
commonly used to refer to a public official
2. It must involve acts which are characterized as
committing an error or improper action that is
contrary to good conscience, or shocking to
not illegal.
judicial sensibilities, or otherwise unlawful,
NONFEASANCE which may be:
a. Force;
 A failure to act when one is under a duty to act. b. Intimidation;
c. Deceit;
ART. 28 Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial
d. Machination;
or industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of
e. Any other unjust, oppressive or high-
force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any other
handed method.
unjust, oppressive or highhanded method shall give
 NOTE: The public injury or interest is a minor
rise to a right of action by the person who thereby
factor; the essence of the matter appears to be
suffers damages.
a private wrong perpetrated by unconscionable
JUSTIFICATION OF INCLUSION OF ART. 28 means (Id.).

 Democracy becomes a veritable mockery if any ART. 29 When the accused in criminal prosecution is
person or group of persons by any unjust or acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not been
high-handed method may deprive others of a proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for
fair chance to engage in business or earn a damages for the same act or omission may be
living (Report of the Code Commission, 31). instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance
of evidence. Upon motion of the defendant, the court
UNFAIR COMPETITION may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for
damages in case the complaint should be found to be
 The term covers even cases of discovery of
malicious.
trade secrets of a competitor, bribery of his
employees, misrepresentation of all kinds, If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based
interference with the fulfillment of a upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so declare. In
competitor’s contracts, or any malicious the absence of any declaration to that effect, it may be
inferred from the text of the decision whether or not not the same be punishable by law (RABUYA,
the acquittal is due to that ground. 95).

 REASON: The evidence required in proving the TWO KINDS OF ACQUITTAL WITH DIFFERENT EFFECTS
criminal liability of an accused is different from ON CIVIL LIABILITY OF THE ACCUSED
the degree of proof necessary in a civil case
(ALBANO, 140).  Not author of Act or Omission – No civil liability.
―The civil action based on delict shall be
deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT final judgment in the criminal action that the
act or omission from which the civil liability may
 The amount of proof which forms an abiding arise did not exist‖ (see Rule 111, Rules of
moral certainty that the accused committed the Court).
crime charged. It is not absolute certainty  Reasonable Doubt – Even if the guilt of the
(Sarmiento v CA, GR No. 96740 [1999]). accused has not been satisfactorily established,
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE he is not exempt from civil liability based on
delict which may be proved by preponderance
 As a whole, the evidence adduced by one side of evidence only.
outweighs that of the adverse party (Id.).
ACQUITTAL BASED ON REASONABLE DOUBT
DELICT AS SOURCE OF CIVIL LIABILITY
 Acquittal extinguishes the liability of the
 Under Art. 1157 (4), delict or crime is one of the accused for damages only when it includes a
sources of obligation. The general rule is that declaration that the facts from which the civil
―every person criminally liable for a felony is liability might arise did not exist.
also civilly liable (Art. 100, RPC)
REASON FOR ABOVE RULE
BASIS OF CIVIL LIABILITY
 The invasion or violation of every private right is
Traditional Theory proved by preponderance of evidence but the
violation of a criminal law is proved beyond
 When a person commits a crime he offends 2
reasonable doubt (see RABUYA, 98). A
entities:
judgment of acquittal operates to extinguish
o The society or State whose law he had
the criminal liability. It does not extinguish the
violated;
civil liability unless there is a clear showing that
o The individual member of that society
the act from which the civil liability might arise
whose person, right, honor, chastity or
did not exist (Padilla v CA, GR No. 39999
property was injured or damaged by
[1984]).
the same punishable act or omission.
ARTICLE 29, EXPLAINED
Pragmatic Theory
 When the offended party opted to institute his
 What gives rise to the civil liability is the
civil action based thereon, expressly or
obligation and the moral duty of everyone to
impliedly with the criminal action and the
repair or make whole the damage cause to
accused was acquitted on reasonable doubt as
another by reason of his own act or omission,
to his guilt, Article 29 automatically reserves for
done intentionally or negligently, whether or
the private offended party the right to institute
 an independent civil action for damages based WHEN CIVIL ACTION IS RESERVED
on the same act or omission and prove it by a
preponderance of evidence despite the fact  The reservation must be made before the
that the offender was held not to be criminally prosecution starts presenting its evidence and
liable and that the injured party has previously under circumstances affording the offended
opted to recover his damage ex delicto party a reasonable opportunity to make such
(RABUYA, 100). reservation (Id., Sec. 1, par. 2). The separate
 NOTE: There is no need to file a separate civil civil action cannot be instituted until final
action considering that the facts to be proved in judgment has been entered in the criminal
the civil case have already been established in action (Id., Sec. 2, par. 1).
the criminal proceedings where the accused is WHEN CIVIL ACTION IS INSTITUTED PRIOR TO CRIMINAL
acquitted (Padilla v CA, GR No. 39999 [1984]). ACTION
CIVIL ACTIONS BASED ON ACQUITTAL  The civil action shall be suspended in whatever
1. Where the Court declares expressly that the stage it may be found before judgment which
liability of the accused is not criminal but only will last until final judgment in the criminal
civil in nature; action. Before judgment is rendered in civil
2. Where civil liability does not arise from or is action, the same may, upon motion of the
not based upon the criminal act of which the offended party, be consolidated with the
accused was acquitted. criminal action (Id., Sec. 2, par. 2).

ART. 30 When a separate civil action is brought to WHEN CIVIL ACTION IS INSTITUTED, BUT NO CRIMINAL
demand civil liability arising from a criminal offense, ACTION
and no criminal proceedings are instituted during the  A preponderance of evidence shall be sufficient
pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of to prove the act complained of (Art. 30).
evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act
complained of. ART. 31 When the civil action is based on an obligation
not arising from the act or omission complained of as a
 NOTE: The civil action may be filed ahead of the felony, such civil action may proceed independently of
criminal action. Plaintiff is required to prove his the criminal proceedings and regardless of the result of
case by preponderance of evidence (ALBANO, the latter.
145).
 REASON - The basis of the civil action is no
longer the criminal liability of the defendant,
IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION but another source, may be a quasi-delict or
 When a criminal action is instituted, the civil tort (ALBANO, 148).
action for the recovery of civil liability arising NOTE: This article refers to a civil action which is no
from the offense charged shall be deemed longer based on the criminal liability of the
instituted with the criminal action, unless the defendant, but on an obligation arising from other
offended party: sources under Art. 1157 (Id.).
o Waives the civil action;
o Reserves the right to institute it
separately;
QUASI DELICT AS SEPARATE SOURCE OF OBLIGATION
o Institute the civil action prior to the
criminal action (Id., Sec. 1, par. 1).
  A quasi delict or culpa aquiliana is a separate  Civil liability for quasi delict or culpa extra
legal institution with a substantivity on its own, contractual under Arts. 2176 to 2194 of the Civil
and individuality that is entirely apart and Code – a distinct and independent negligence,
independent from delict or crime. The same having always had its own foundation and
negligence causing damages may produce civil individuality.
liability arising from a crime under the Penal
Code, or create an action for quasi delictos NOTE: Either of the 2 types of civil liability may be
enforced against the culprit, subject to the caveat of
under the Civil Code (Id., 104).
prohibition against double recovery under Art. 2177
REQUISITES [AFI ReN] (Jarantilla v CA, 171 SCRA 429, 436 [1989]).

1. Act or omission by the defendant; PROHIBITION AGAINST DOUBLE RECOVERY

2. Fault or negligence by the defendant;
3. Damage or injury to the plaintiff;  Although a single act or omission may give rise
4. Direct relation or connection of cause and to two different causes of action, the plaintiff
effect between the act or omission and the cannot recover damages twice for the same act
damage; or omission of the defendant (Art 2177, CC).
5. There is no pre-existing contractual relation QUASI DELICT COVERS ACTS CRIMINAL IN CHARACTER
between the parties (DE LEON, Comments and
Cases on Torts and Damages (2012), 185)  Art. 2176, whenever it refers to ―fault of
negligence, covers not only acts ―not
FAULT OR NEGLIGENCE punishable by law but also acts criminal in
 Consists in the omission of that diligence which character, whether intentional and voluntary or
is required by the nature of the obligation and negligent. Culpa aquiliana includes voluntary
corresponds with the circumstances of the and negligent acts which may be punishable by
persons, of the time and of the place (Art. law (Elcano v Hill, 77 SCRA 98 [1977]).
1173). ART. 32 Any public officer or employee, or any private
ACQUITTAL OF ACCUSED, IRRELEVANT IN QUASI DELICT individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats,
violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of
 The extinction of civil liability referred to in Sec. the following rights and liberties of another person
2 (b), Rule 111, refers exclusively to civil liability shall be liable to the latter for damages:
founded on Art. 100 of the RPC, whereas the
civil liability for the same act considered as a 1. Freedom of religion;
quasi delict only and not as a crime is not 2. Freedom of speech;
extinguished even by a declaration in the
criminal case that the criminal act charged has 3. Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a
not happened or has not been committed by periodical publication;
the accused (Tayag v Alcantara, 98 SCRA 723,
4. Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention;
728 [1980]).
5. Freedom of suffrage;
SAME NEGLIGENT ACT MAY PRODUCE TWO KINDS OF
CIVIL LIABILITIES 6. The right against deprivation of property without
due process of law;
 Civil liability ex delicto under Art. 100 of the RPC
– a violation of a criminal law;
7. The right to a just compensation when private the latter be instituted), and may be proved by a
property is taken for public use; preponderance of evidence. The indemnity shall
include moral damages. Exemplary damages may also
8. The right to the equal protection of the laws; be adjudicated. The responsibility herein set forth is
9. The right to be secure in one’s person, house, not demandable from a judge unless his act or
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and omission constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or
seizures; other penal statute.

10. The liberty of abode and of changing the same; INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS

11. The privacy of communication and correspondence;  An action which can proceed independently of
the criminal action and shall require only a
12. The right to become a member of associations or preponderance of evidence, subject to
societies for purposes not contrary to law; prohibition for double recovery. [CD PC]
1. Breach of constitutional and other rights
13. The right to take part in a peaceable assembly to
(Art. 32);
petition the government for redress of grievances;
2. Defamation, fraud, physical injuries (Art. 33).
14. The right to be free from involuntary servitude in 3. Refusal or failure of city or municipal police
any form; to give protection (Art. 34);
4. Quasi delict or culpa aquiliana (Art. 2177).
15. The right of the accused against excessive bail;
REASONS FOR THE PROVISION
16. The right of the accused to be heard by himself and
counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the  To prevent non-filing of action because of
accusation against him, to have a speedy and public insufficiency of evidence or to disinclination of
trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have fiscal to prosecute a fellow public official;
compulsory process to secure the attendance of  To prevent non-fling of action because of the
witness in his behalf; requirement of proof beyond reasonable
doubt;
17. Freedom from being compelled to be a witness  Direct and open violation of the Penal Code
against one’s self, or from being forced to confess trampling upon the freedoms named are not so
guilt, or from being induced by a promise of immunity frequent as those subtle, clever and indirect
or reward to make such confession, except when the ways which do not come within the pale of the
person confessing becomes a State witness; penal law (RABUYA, 108-109).

18. Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel or unusual WHEN PUBLIC OFFICER PERSONALLY LIABLE
punishment, unless the same is imposed or inflicted in
accordance with a statute which has not been  An individual can hold a public officer
judicially declared unconstitutional; and personally liable for damages on account of an
act or omission that violates a constitutional
19. Freedom of access to the courts. In any of the cases right only if it results in a particular wrong or
referred to in this article, whether or not the injury to the former (Vinzons-Chato v Fotune
defendant’s act or omission constitute a criminal Tobacco Corp, GR No. 141309 [2008]).
offense, the aggrieved party has a right to commence
an entirely separate and distinct civil action for KINDS OF DUTIES EXERCISED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
damages, and for other relief. Such civil action shall
proceed independently of any criminal prosecution (if
 1) Duty owing to the public collectively – who act ARTICLE 33, EXPLAINED
for the public at large, and who are ordinarily
paid out of the public treasury;  Art. 33 contemplates a civil action for recovery
2) Duty owing to particular individuals – who, of damages that is entirely unrelated to the
while they owe to the public the general duty of purely criminal aspect of the case. This is the
a proper administration of their respective reason why only a preponderance of evidence
offices, yet become, by reason of their and not proof beyond reasonable doubt is
employment by a particular individual to do deemed sufficient in such civil action. Thus,
some act for him in an official capacity, under a the outcome or result of the criminal case,
special and particular obligation to him as an whether of an acquittal or conviction is really
individual. They serve individuals chiefly and inconsequential and will be of no moment in
usually receive their compensation from fees the civil action (Id.).
paid by each individual who employs them. ACTION PERTAINS TO EX DELICTO
GENERAL RULE  The civil action for damages which Article 33
 The liability of a public officer to an individual allows to be instituted is ex delicto. This is
or the public is based upon and is co-extensive manifested from the provision which uses the
with his duty to the individual or the public. If expressions ―criminal actions and ―criminal
to the one or the other he owes no duty, to prosecution (Id., 120-121).
that one he can incur no liability (Vinzons-
Chato v Fotune Tobacco Corp, GR No. 141309
[2008]). REASON

EXCEPTION  It is true that in many of the cases referred to

in the provision cited, a criminal prosecution is
 When the complaining individual suffers a proper, but it should be remembered that
particular or special injury on account of the while the State is the complainant in the
public officer’s improper performance or non- criminal case, the injured individual is the one
performance of his public duty (Id.). most concerned because it is he who has
NOTE: suffered directly (Madeja v Caro, GR No. L-
51183 [1983]).
 Good faith is not a defense under Article 32 for
it is not necessary that the defendant should NOTE:
have acted with malice or bad faith. To make  In article 33, the words defamation, fraud, and
such a requisite would defeat the main purpose physical injuries are used in their ordinary
of said article which is effective protection of sense with no relation to those in the RPC
individual rights (RABUYA, 120). (Carandang v Santiago, 97 Phil. 94, 96-97
ART. 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical [1955]).
injuries, a civil action for damages, entirely separate NOTE:
and distinct from the criminal action, may be brought
by the injured party, such civil action shall proceed  Criminal negligence is included in Art. 33.
independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall
ART. 34 When a member of a city or municipal police
require only a preponderance of evidence.
force refuses or fails to render aid or protection to any
person in case of danger to life or property, such peach Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing
officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the fees shall be required for actual damages.
city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible
therefor. The civil action herein recognized shall be No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint
may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but any
independent of any criminal proceedings, and a
cause of action which could have been the subject
preponderance of evidence shall suffice to support thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action. (1a)
action.
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa
MEMBERS OF POLICE FORCE Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding
civil action. No reservation to file such civil action
 It is the duty of police officers to see to it that separately shall be allowed.
peace and order are maintained in the
community. Hence, should a citizen go to them Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil
to seek assistance, their failure or refusal to actions, the offended party shall pay in full the filing
render the needed assistance to maintain fees based on the amount of the check involved, which
lawful order can be a basis for claiming shall be considered as the actual damages claimed.
Where the complaint or information also seeks to
damages against them. The city or municipality
recover liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or
shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor (STA exemplary damages, the offended party shall pay
MARIA, 68). additional filing fees based on the amounts alleged
therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of
Rule 111, Rules of Criminal Procedure these damages are subsequently awarded by the court,
the filing fees based on the amount awarded shall
Prosecution of Civil Action constitute a first lien on the judgment.

Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. — (a) Where the civil action has been filed separately and trial
When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for thereof has not yet commenced, it may be consolidated
the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense with the criminal action upon application with the court
charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal trying the latter case. If the application is granted, the
action unless the offended party waives the civil action, trial of both actions shall proceed in accordance with
reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes section 2 of this Rule governing consolidation of the civil
the civil action prior to the criminal action. and criminal actions. (cir. 57-97)

The reservation of the right to institute separately the Section 2. When separate civil action is suspended. —
civil action shall be made before the prosecution starts After the criminal action has been commenced, the
presenting its evidence and under circumstances separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be
affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity instituted until final judgment has been entered in the
to make such reservation. criminal action.

When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action
against the accused by way of moral, nominal, has already been instituted, the latter shall be
temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying suspended in whatever stage it may be found before
the amount thereof in the complaint or information, the judgment on the merits. The suspension shall last until
filing fees thereof shall constitute a first lien on the final judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
judgment awarding such damages. Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is
rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon motion
Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is of the offended party, be consolidated with the criminal
specified in the complaint or information, the action in the court trying the criminal action. In case of
corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil
party upon the filing thereof in court. action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the
criminal action without prejudice to the right of the these rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of
prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented the deceased.
by the offended party in the criminal case and of the
parties to present additional evidence. The consolidated If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be
criminal and civil actions shall be tried and decided dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the
jointly. offended party may file against the estate of the
deceased. (n)
During the pendency of the criminal action, the running
of the period of prescription of the civil action which Section 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar. — A final
cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the
has been suspended shall be tolled. (n) defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a criminal
action against the defendant for the same act or
The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it omission subject of the civil action. (4a)
extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action
based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is Section 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question.
a finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that — A petition for suspension of the criminal action based
the act or omission from which the civil liability may upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil
arise did not exist. (2a) action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the
court conducting the preliminary investigation. When
Section 3. When civil action may proceeded the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the
independently. — In the cases provided for in Articles petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal
32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, action at any time before the prosecution rests. (6a)
the independent civil action may be brought by the
offended party. It shall proceed independently of the Section 7. Elements of prejudicial question. — The
criminal action and shall require only a preponderance elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the
of evidence. In no case, however, may the offended previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar
party recover damages twice for the same act or or intimately related to the issue raised in the
omission charged in the criminal action. (3a) subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of
such issue determines whether or not the criminal
Section 4. Effect of death on civil actions. — The death action may proceed. (5a)
of the accused after arraignment and during the
pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the civil MADEJA vs. CARO
liability arising from the delict. However, the
independent civil action instituted under section 3 of FACTS:
this Rule or which thereafter is instituted to enforce
liability arising from other sources of obligation may be In criminal case no. 75-88 of the defunct Court of First
continued against the estate or legal representative of Instance of Eastern Samar, Dr Eva A. Japzon is accused
the accused after proper substitution or against said of homicide through reckless imprudence for the death
estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the accused of Cleto Madeja after an appendectomy. The
may be substituted for the deceased without requiring
complaining witness is the widow of the deceased,
the appointment of an executor or administrator and
Carmen L. Madeja. The information states that: “The
the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor
heirs. offended party Carmen Madeja reserving her right to
file a separate civil action for damages.” The criminal
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative case still pending, Carmen sued Dr. Eva for damages in
or representatives to appear and be substituted within civil case no. 141 of the same court. She alleged that he
a period of thirty (30) days from notice. husband died because of the gross negligence of Dr.
Japzon. The Respondent judge granted the defendant’s
A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party
motion to dismiss which motion invoke Sec 3(a) of Rule
shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in
111 of the R of C which reads:
 Section 3. When civil action may proceeded finds no reasonable grounds to believe that a crime
independently. — In the cases provided for in Articles has been committed, or the prosecuting attorney
32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, refuses or fails to institute criminal proceedings, the
the independent civil action may be brought by the complainant may bring a civil action for damages
offended party. It shall proceed independently of the against the alleged offender. Such civil action shall be
criminal action”… supported by preponderance of evidence. Upon the
defendant’s motion, the court may require the plaintiff
According to the respondent judge, “under the to fi le a bond to indemnify the defendant in case the
foregoing Sec 3 (a) of the Rule 111, new rules of Court, complaint should be found to be malicious. If during
the instant civil action may be instituted only after final the pendency of the civil action, an information should
judgment has been rendered in the criminal action.” be presented by the prosecuting attorney, the civil
Hence, the instant petition which seeks to set aside the action shall be suspended until the termination of the
order of the respondent judge granting the defendant’s criminal proceedings.
motion to dismiss Civil Case No. 141. NOTE:
ISSUE:  See Rule 111 of the Rules of Court of the
WON the civil action against Dr. Japson may proceed Philippines.
independently of the criminal action against her.
NOTE:
RULING:  If during the pendency of the civil action, an
Yes. Sec 2, Rule 111 of the R of C in relation to Article 33 information should be presented by the
of the NCC is the applicable provision. prosecuting attorney, the civil action shall be
suspended until the termination of the criminal
Sec 2. Independent civil action (See Rule 111 above) proceedings (ALBANO, 165).

Art 33. (see art 33) ART. 36 Prejudicial questions, which must be decided
before any criminal prosecution may be instituted or
1. The civil action for damages which it allows to
may proceed, shall be governed by the rules of court
be instituted is ex-delicto. This is manifest from
which the Supreme Court shall promulgate and which
the provisions “criminal action” and “criminal
shall not be in conflict with the provisions of this Code.
prosecution”
PRECEDENCE
Tolentino said:
 General Rule
The general rule is that when a criminal action is
o Where both a civil and criminal case
instituted, the civil action for recovery of civil liability
arising from the same facts are filed in
arising from the offense charged is impliedly instituted
court, the criminal case takes
with the criminal action, unless the offended party
precedence.
reserves his right to institute it separately.
 Exception
o If there exist prejudicial question which
should be resolved first before action
ART. 35 When a person, claiming to be injured by a could be taken in a criminal case and
criminal offense, charges another with the same, for when the law provides that both civil
which no independent civil action is granted in this and criminal case can be instituted
Code or any special law, but the justice of the peace
 simultaneously such as that provided in issue in the civil case is prejudicial to the criminal case
Art. 33. for estafa.

ISSUE:
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
WON the Judge correct in motu proprio dismissing the
 One which arises in a case, the resolution of criminal case?
which question is logical antecedent of the issue
involved in said case. It is one based on a fact RULING:
distinct and separate from the crime but so
The judge is wrong. First, he should not have
intimately connected with it that it determines
dismissed the criminal case but only suspended it.
the guilt or innocence of the accused, and for it
Second, it was wrong for him to dismiss the
to suspend the criminal action, it must appear
criminal case outright, since it requires a motion
not only that said case involves facts intimately first from the proper party.
related to those which the prosecution would
be based but also that in the resolution of the The rule provides: Sec. 6. Suspension by reason of
issue or issues raised in the civil case, the guilt prejudicial question. — A petition for suspension of
or innocence of the accused would be the criminal action based upon the pendency of a
necessarily be determined (RABUYA, 123). prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed in
the office of the fiscal or the court conducting the
RULE 111, SEC 7, RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE preliminary investigation. When the criminal action
(ABOVE) has been filed in court for trial, the petition to
suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at
YAP vs. PARAS
any time before the prosecution rests. Third, there
FACTS: is actually no prejudicial question here.
Anent the issue of prejudicial question, the rule
On October 31, 1971, according to Yap, Paras sold to provides that:
her his share in the intestate estate of their parents for
P300.00. The sale was evidenced by a private Section 5, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal
document. Nineteen years later, on May 2, 1990, Paras Procedure as amended provides:
sold the same property to Santiago Saya-ang for Sec. 5. Elements of prejudicial question.
P5,000.00. This was evidenced by a notarized Deed of — The two (2) essential elements of a
prejudicial question are: (a) the civil
Absolute Sale.
action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in
When Yap learned of the second sale, she filed a
the criminal action; and (b) the
complaint for estafa against Paras and Saya-ang with
resolution of such issue determines
the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of General whether or not the criminal action may
Santos City. On the same date, she filed a complaint for proceed.
the nullification of the said sale with the Regional Trial
Court of General Santos City. A prejudicial question is defined as that which
After investigation, the Provincial Prosecutor instituted arises in a case the resolution of which is a logical
a criminal complaint for estafa against Paras with the antecedent of the issue involved therein, and the
Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Glan-Malapatan, South cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal.
Cotabato, presided by Judge Alfredo D. Barcelona, Sr., The prejudicial question must be determinative of
who dismissed the criminal case on the ground that the the case before the court but the jurisdiction to try
and resolve the question must be lodged in
another court or tribunal. It is a question based on complaint alleging acts of unfair competition committed
a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so by Hemandas and requesting the agency’s assistance. A
intimately connected with it that it determines the search warrant was issued by the trial court. Various
guilt or innocence of the accused. goods and articles were seized upon the execution of
the warrants. Hemandas filed motion to quash the
It was held that "for a civil case to be considered warrants, which the court granted. The search warrants
prejudicial to a criminal action as to cause the were recalled, and the goods ordered to be
suspension of the criminal action pending the returned. La Chemise Lacoste filed a petition for
determination of the civil action, it must appear
certiorari.
not only that the civil case involves the same facts
upon which the criminal prosecution is based, but
Issue:
also that the resolution of the issues raised in said
civil action would be necessarily determinative of
the guilt or innocence of the accused". WON the proceedings before the patent office is a
Indeed, the civil case at bar does not involve the prejudicial question that need to be resolved before the
same facts upon which the criminal action is criminal action for unfair competition may be pursued.
based. There was no motion for suspension in the
case at bar; and no less importantly, the RULING:
respondent judge had not been informed of the No. The proceedings pending before the Patent Office
defense Paras was raising in the civil action. Judge do not partake of the nature of a prejudicial
Barcelona could not have ascertained then if the question which must first be definitely resolved. The
issue raised in the civil action would determine the case which suspends the criminal action must be a civil
guilt or innocence of the accused in the criminal case, not a mere administrative case, which is
case. determinative of the innocence or guilt of the
accused. The issue whether a trademark used is
LA CHEMISE LACOSTE, S.A. vs. FERNANDEZ different from another’s trademark is a matter of
defense and will be better resolved in the criminal
Facts: proceedings before a court of justice instead of raising it
as a preliminary matter in an administrative proceeding.
La chemise Lacoste is a French corporation and the
actual owner of the trademarks “Lacoste,” “Chemise Inasmuch as the goodwill and reputation of La Chemise
Lacoste,” “Crocodile Device” and a composite mark Lacoste products date back even before 1964,
consisting of the word “Lacoste” and a representation Hemandas cannot be allowed to continue the
of a crocodile/alligator, used on clothings and other trademark “Lacoste” for the reason that he was the first
goods sold in many parts of the world and which has registrant in the Supplemental Register of a trademark
been marketed in the Philippines (notably by Rustans) used in international commerce. Registration in the
since 1964. In 1975 and 1977, Hemandas Q. Co. was Supplemental Register cannot be given a posture as if
issued certificate of registration for the trademark the registration is in the Principal Register. It must be
“Chemise Lacoste and Q Crocodile Device” both in the noted that one may be declared an unfair competitor
supplemental and Principal Registry. In 1980, La even if his competing trademark is registered. La
Chemise Lacoste SA filed for the registration of the Chemise Lacoste is world renowned mark, and by virtue
“Crocodile device” and “Lacoste”. Games and of the 20 November 1980 Memorandum of the Minister
Garments (Gobindram Hemandas, assignee of of Trade to the director of patents in compliance with
Hemandas Q.Co.) opposed the registration of “Lacoste.” the Paris Convention for the protection of industrial
property, effectively cancels the registration of contrary
In 1983, La Chemise Lacoste filed with the NBI a letter-
claimants to the enumerated marks, which include  Any being, natural or artificial, capable of
“Lacoste" possessing legal rights and obligations (PARAS,
221). It is every physical or moral, real or
OCAMPO vs. BUENAVENTURA juridical, and legal being susceptible of rights
and obligations or being the subject of legal
relations (Sanchez Roman, 110).
ELEMENTS
CIVIL PERSONALITY
1) Previously instituted civil action involves an
issue similarly or intimately related to the issue  The aptitude to be the subject, active or
raised in the subsequent criminal action; passive, of juridical relations (RABUYA, 128).
2) The resolution of such issue determined TWO KINDS OF PERSONS
whether or not the criminal action may
proceed (Sec. 7, Rule 111, Revised Rules of 1) Natural Persons – human beings created by God
CrimPro). through the intervention of parents (PARAS,
221).
NOTE: 2) Juridical Persons – artificial beings susceptible
 It is the issue in the civil action that is prejudicial of rights and obligations or being the subject of
to the continuation of the criminal action, and legal relations (RABUYA, 129). Those created by
not vice-versa (Yap v Paras, 205 SCRA 630 law (PARAS, 221).
[1992]).
JURIDICAL CAPACITY CAPACITY TO ACT
AS TO NATURE
SUSPENSION OF PROCEEDINGS
Fitness to be the legal Power to do acts with
 Suspension of criminal action based upon the subject of legal relations; legal effects;
pendency of prejudicial question may be filed in AS TO STATUS
Passive Active
the office of prosecutor or the court conducting
AS TO ACQUISITION
preliminary investigation. When the criminal
It is enough for a person Intelligence and volition is
action has been filed in court for trial, the to exists, i.e., it is inherent required and since these
suspension shall be filed in the same at any and ineffaceable attribute; do not exist in all men nor
time before the prosecution rests (Sec. 6, Rule to the same extent, the
111, Rules of Court). The rule authorizes only law denies capacity to act
the suspension of the criminal action and not its absolutely to some and
limits it with regards to
dismissal by reason of prejudicial question (Yap
others;
v Paras, 205 SCRA 630 [1992]). As to condition of the subject
Static; Dynamic
As to effect of death
CIVIL PERSONALITY Lost only through death; Lost through death and
restricted by other causes;
ART. 37. Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be As to existence
the subject of legal relations, is inherent in every Can exist without capacity Always exists with juridical
natural person and is lost only through death. to act; capacity;
As to limitation
Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts with
Cannot be limited or Can be limited or
legal effect, is acquired and may be lost. restricted; restricted by
circumstances;
PERSON
  Article 38 provides only restrictions on one’s
NOTE: capacity to act. It does not mean that the
person suffering therefrom does not possess
 Juridical capacity is merely the holding or
capacity to act (RABUYA, 131).
enjoyment of rights; while capacity to act is the
aptitude for the exercise of such rights and to NOTE:
consummate juridical acts (RABUYA, 129).
 Article 39 enumerates circumstances which
NOTE: modify one’s capacity to act. The enumeration
is not exclusive (Id.).
 Estate of a decedent is considered by law as a
person. Hence, a forgery committed after the INCAPACITIES TO ACT
death of a man whose name purports to be
signed to the instrument may be prosecuted as  Those mentioned in Arts. 38 and 39 are
with intent to defraud the estate (Limjoco v limitations or restrictions on capacity to act.
Estate of Pedro Fragante, GR No. L-770 [1948]). They are based on subjective circumstances of
certain persons which compel the law to
NOTE: withhold or suspend for a certain time the
capacity to perform certain juridical acts (Id.).
 A person is presumed to have capacity to act
(Standard Oil Co. v Arenas, GR No. L-5921 DISQUALIFICATIONS
[1911]).
 Based on reasons or morality. While
FULL/COMPLETE CIVIL CAPACITY incapacities restrict the exercise of right;
disqualifications or prohibitions restrict the
 The union of the two kinds of capacity (PARAS,
enjoyment of right itself. E.g., prohibitions
222).
against spouses from donating (Art. 87, FC) or
ART. 38 Minority, insanity, or imbecility, the state of selling (Art. 1490, CC) to each other or those
being a deafmute, prodigality and civil interdiction are mentioned in Art. 1491 (Id.).
mere restriction on capacity to act, and do not exempt
LIABILITY OF INCAPACITATED PERSONS
the incapacitated person from certain obligations, as
when the latter arise from his acts or from property  Incapacitated persons are no exempted from
relations, such as easements. certain obligations, as when these obligations
arise from his acts or from property relations,
ART. 39. The following circumstances, among others,
such as easements (Art. 38). E.g., while an
modify or limit the capacity to act: age, insanity,
insane person is exempt from criminal liability,
imbecility, the state of being a deaf-mute, penalty,
hi civil liability shall devolve upon his parent or
prodigality, family relations, alienage, absence,
guardian, if there was fault or negligence on
insolvency and trusteeship. The consequences of these
their part and if none, upon the property of the
circumstances are governed in this Code, other codes,
insane person (see Art. 101, RPC).
the Rules of Court, and in special laws. Capacity to act
is not limited on account of religious belief or political RESTRICTIONS ON CAPACITY TO ACT (MIS PC)
opinion. A married woman, twenty-one years of age
or over, is qualified for all acts of civil life, except in 1. Minority;
cases specified by law. 2. Insanity or imbecility;
3. State of being deaf-mute;
NOTE: 4. Prodigality;
 5. Civil interdiction  Insane or demented persons, and deaf-mutes
who do not know how to write cannot give
MINORITY consent to contract (see Art. 1327, no. 2, CC).
 A state of a person who is under the age of legal NOTE:
majority and a minor is a person below 18 years
of age since majority commences upon  An insane person cannot make a valid will or
attaining the age of 19 (RA 6809). testament (see Art. 798, CC).
Emancipation of a minor can only now take
place by attainment of majority (RABUYA, 132). NOTE:

MISREPRESENTATION OF AGE  Contracts entered into by an imbecile, insane,

or demented person are voidable (see Art.
 When a minor misrepresented his age and 1390, no. 1).
mislead the other party into believing that he is
of age, the minor on reaching the age of NOTE:
majority can no longer annul the contract on  The presumption is for the sanity of the person.
the ground of estoppel. He is not permitted to
excuse himself from the fulfill of his obligation NOTE:
(Sia Suan v Alcantara, GR No. L-1720 [1950]).
 It is only that insanity which prevents a person
 But when a minor did not ask for annulment of
from knowing the character of the act that he is
his contract upon attainment of majority age,
performing as well as its legal effects which will
the Court said that knowing his rights, he should
be ground for annulment, not every kind of
have promptly disaffirmed his contract after
insanity (RABUYA, 141).
attaining the age of majority but permitted the
other party to continue making payments (Uy
Soo Lim v Tan Unchuan, GR No. 12605 [1918]).

IMBECILE
PRESUMPTION OF SANITY
 A person who while advanced in age has the
mental capacity comparable to that of a child  Every person is presumed to be of sound mind,
between two or seven years of age. In criminal in the absence of proof to the contrary (Art.
law, under Art. 12, the imbecile is exempt in all 800). Mental incapacity to enter into a contract
cases from criminal liability (RABUYA, 140). is a question of fact which must be decided by
the courts. The burden of proving incapacity at
INSANE the time of the execution rests upon he who
alleges it, is no sufficient proof to this effect is
 An insane person is one whose mental faculties
presented, his capacity will be presumed.
are diseased. An insane person is not exempt,
in criminal law, if it can be shown that he acted DEAF AND MUTISM
during a lucid interval. During lucid interval, the
insane acts with intelligence. The lucid interval  Only deaf-mutes who do not know how to write
must be proved as a fact (Id.). are declared by law incapable of giving consent
(see Art. 1327). Contracts entered into by a
NOTE: deaf-mute who knows how to write is perfectly
valid (RABUYA, 141).
CIVIL INTERDICTION neighbour to use a shortcut through the
adjoining land which has been used for many
 An accessory penalty imposed upon an accused
years.
who is sentence to a principal penalty not lower
than reclusion temporal (12 years and 1 day to
20 years).
MODIFICATIONS/LIMITATIONS ON CAPACITY TO ACT
Produces the following effects of deprivation of:
1. Family relations;
PIG MM 2. Insanity;
3. Imbecility;
1. Parental authority; 4. Insolvency;
2. Right to dispose his property by an act 5. Trusteeship;
inter vivos EXCEPTION: right to dispose 6. Penalty (Civil Interdiction);
property by an act mortis causa. 7. Prodigality;
3. Guardianship of any ward; 8. Age
4. Marital rights and authority;
9. Alienage;
5. Management of his property. 10. Absence;
PRODIGALITY 11. State of being deaf-mute

 State of squandering money or property with a NATURAL PERSONS

morbid desire to prejudice the heirs of a person ART. 40. Birth determines personality; but the
(Martinez v Martinez, GR No. 445 [1902]).
conceived child shall be considered born for all
Prodigality in itself does not limit the capacity of purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be born
a person to act. He may enter into contracts later with the conditions specified in the following
and make wills disposing of his property. There article.
is no specific provision which incapacitates him
for any particular act. But he may be placed ART. 41. For civil purposes, the fetus is considered
under guardianship as an incompetent under born if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered
the provisions of Rule 93, Sec. 2 of the Rules of from the mother’s womb. However, if the fetus had an
Court. intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not
 The moment he is under guardianship, his deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after
capacity to act then becomes restricted because its complete delivery from the maternal womb.
he can only bind himself in a contract through
his guardian (RABUYA, 142). NOTE:

 If the conditions specified in Art. 41 are not

EASEMENT
complied with, the birth and the death of the
 A liberty privilege or advantage, which one child will not be recorded in the Civil Registry
man may have in the lands of another, without (PARAS, 229).
profit; it may arise by deed or prescription. It is
the right to use the property of another for a GENERAL RULE
specific purpose. It is a right where one  Birth determines actual personality.
person or entity may use the land or real
property of another for a specific purpose. I.e., EXCEPTION
the common right of way which allows a
  The civil personality of the child shall legitimated by a subsequent marriage, or
commence from the time of its conception, for illegitimate, may be revoked or reduced as
all purposes favorable to him, subject to the provided in the next article, by the happening of
requirements of Art. 41 of the Civil Code (PD any of these events:
903, Art. 5). This personality at conception is a. If the donor, after the donation, should
called Presumptive Personality. have legitimate or legitimated or
illegitimate children, even though they
CHARACTERISTICS OF PRESUMPTIVE PERSONALITY be posthumous (Art. 760);
1. Limited – because it only for purposes favorable 3. The preterition or omission of one, some, or all
to the child; of the compulsory heirs in the direct line,
2. Provisional or condition – because it depends whether living at the time of the execution of
upon the child being born alive later, such that the will or born after the death of the testator,
if it is not born alive, its personality disappears shall annul the institution of heir; but the
as if it had never existed (Quimiguing v Icao, GR devises and legacies shall be valid insofar as
No. L-26795 [1970]). they are not inofficious (Art. 854);
4. A child already conceived at the time of the
WHEN A PERSON IS CONSIDERED BORN death of the descendent is capable of
succeeding provided it be born later under the
 General Rule:
conditions prescribe in Article 41 (Art. 1025,
o For Civil Purposes, the fetus is
par. 2);
considered born if it is alive at the time
5. The unborn child has a right to support from its
it is completely delivered from the
progenitors, even if said child is only en ventre
mother’s womb (Art. 41).
de sa mere (RABUYA, 146).
 Exception: If the fetus had an intra-uterine life
of less than 7 months, it is not deemed born if WHEN TO APPLY ARTICLES 40 AND 41
it dies within 24 hours after its complete
delivery from the maternal womb (Art. 41).  Arts. 40-42 must be applied in relation to Art.
37. There is no need to establish the civil
COMPLETE DELIVERY personality of the unborn child if his/her
juridical capacity and capacity to act as a person
 The cutting of the umbilical cord so that if after
are not in issue and the case is not whether the
the cutting of the umbilical cord the child is
unborn child has acquired any rights or incurred
alive, even only for a few hours, it is considered
any obligations prior to his/her death that were
a person. This rule only applies only when the
passed on to or assumed by the child’s parents.
fetus had an intra-uterine life of at least 7
Hence, when the issue in a case pertains
months (RABUYA, 146).
directly to the rights of the parents of the
FAVORABLE SITUATIONS FOR AN UNBORN FETUS unborn child, the above-mentioned provisions
PROVIDED BY THE LAW do not apply (RABUYA, 152-153).

1. Donations made to conceived and unborn RULE IN CASE OF ABORTIVE INFANTS

children may be accepted by those who would
 If a physician operates on a pregnant woman
legally represent them if they are already born
and succeeds in aborting the fetus, the parents
(Art. 742);
would normally be entitled only to moral
2. Every donation inter vivos, made by a person
damages and exemplary damages, if warranted,
having no children or descendants, legitimate or
but not to actual damages (PARAS, 229).
NOTE: begun by a decedent’s estate cannot be said to
have been begun by a legal person, since an
 Art. 2206 of the Civil Code does not cover the estate is not a legal entity; such an action is a
case of an unborn fetus, since this is not nullity and a motion to amend the party
endowed with personality (Geluz v CA, L-16439 plaintiff will not likewise lie, there being nothing
[1961]). before the court to amend (RABUYA,154-155).
ART. 42. Civil personality is extinguished by death. NOTE:
The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of
the deceased is determined by law, by contract and by  Considering that capacity to be sued is a
will. correlative of the capacity to sue, to the same
extent, a decedent does not have the capacity
DEATH to be sued and may not be named a party
 The cessation of life. The ceasing to exist. defendant in a court action (Id, 155).

CIVIL DEATH NOTE:

 The state of a person who, though possessing a  When the deceased was made a party
natural life has lost all his civil rights, and as to defendant but there was no objection to the
them, is considered as dead (ALBANO, 189). amendment of the complaint to substitute the
deceased by impleading her intestate estate as
NOTE: party defendant, there is deemed a waiver of
any objection on the personality of the estate of
 Art. 42 refers to physical death and not
the deceased as party of the action (Id.).
presumed death. In case of presumed death,
the person is merely presumed dead because of NOTE:
his absence. But in case of reappearance, he
can recover his properties or the price thereof if  If a person be made a voluntary heir in the will
they have been distributed (Id.). of another and he dies before the testator, he
cannot be represented by his own heirs.
NOTE:
NOTE:
 Civil interdiction merely restricts, not
extinguishes, capacity to act (PARAS, 232).  The estate of a deceased is a person that may
continue the personality of the deceased even
EFFECT OF PHYSICAL DEATH IS DETERMINED BY after death – for the purpose of settling debts
(Limjuco v Estate of Pedro Fragante, 45 OG No.
1. Law; 2. Contract; 3. Will.
9, p. 397).
NOTE:

 Since the civil or legal personality of a person is

extinguished upon death, neither a dead person
nor his estate may be a party plaintiff in a court
action. A deceased person does not have such
legal entity as is necessary to bring action so
much so that a motion to substitute cannot lie
and should be denied by the court. An action