HEDY GAN y YU, Petitioner, v.
THE HONORABLE she should have stepped on the brakes immediately
COURT OF APPEALS and the PEOPLE OF THE or in swerving her vehicle to the right should have
PHILIPPINES, Respondents.[G.R. No. L-44264. also stepped on the brakes or lessened her speed, to
September 19, 1988.] avoid the death of a pedestrian?
Doctrine: EMERGENCY RULE. — A corollary rule is Held and Ratio: YES.
what is known in the law as the emergency rule.
"Under that rule, one who suddenly finds himself in The test for determining whether or not a person is
a place of danger, and is required to act without negligent in doing an act whereby injury or damage
time to consider the best means that may be results to the person or property of another is this:
adopted to avoid the impending danger, is not guilty Would a prudent man in the position of the person
of negligence, if he fails to adopt what subsequently to whom negligence is attributed foresee harm to
and upon reflection may appear to have been a the person injured as a reasonable consequence of
better method, unless the emergency in which he the course about to be pursued? If so, the law
finds himself is brought about by his own imposes the duty on the doer to take precaution
negligence." against its mischievous results and the failure to do
so constitutes negligence.
Prior Proceedings:
CFI Manila- Gan was convicted of Homicide thru Applying the emergency rule (as defined above),
Reckless Imprudence. petitioner is not guilty of the crime. The amount of
CA- Judgment modified, Homicide thru simple time afforded to the petitioner to react to the
imprudence. situation she was in should be taken into account for
SC- Reversed CA, acquitted Gan. it is undeniable that the suggested course of action
presupposes sufficient time for appellant to analyze
Facts of the Case:HedyGan was driving a Toyota car the situation confronting her and to ponder on
along North Bay Boulevard, Tondo, Manila. While in which of the different courses of action would result
front of house no. 694 of North Bay Boulevard, there in the least possible harm to herself and to others.
were two vehicles, a truck and a jeepney parked on
one side of the road, one following the other about Under the circumstances narrated by petitioner, we
two to three meters from each other. As the car find that the appellate court is asking too much from
driven by the accused approached the place where a mere mortal like the petitioner who in the blink of
the two vehicles were parked, there was a vehicle an eye had to exercise her best judgment to
coming from the opposite direction, followed by extricate herself from a difficult and dangerous
another which tried to overtake and bypass the one situation caused by the driver of the overtaking
in front of it and thereby encroached the lane of the vehicle. Petitioner certainly could not be expected to
car driven by the accused. To avoid a head-on act with all the coolness of a person under normal
collision with the oncoming vehicle, the defendant conditions. The danger confronting petitioner was
swerved to the right and as a consequence, the front real and imminent, threatening her very existence.
bumper of the Toyota Crown Sedan hit an old man She had no opportunity for rational thinking but only
who was about to cross the boulevard from south to enough time to heed the very powerful instinct of
north, pinning him against the rear of the parked self-preservation.
jeepney. The force of the impact caused the parked
jeepney to move forward hitting the rear of the Also, the respondent court itself pronounced that
parked truck ahead of it. The pedestrian was injured, the petitioner was driving her car within the legal
the Toyota Sedan was damaged on its front, the jeep limits. We therefore rule that the "emergency rule"
suffered damages on its rear and front parts, and the enunciated above applies with full force to the case
truck sustained scratches at the wooden portion of at bar and consequently absolve petitioner from any
its rear. The body of Isidoro Casino was immediately criminal negligence in connection with the incident
brought to the hospital but was (pronounced) dead under consideration.
on arrival.
Issue: Did the CA erred in holding that when the
petitioner saw a car travelling directly towards her,
