FACTS:

In this case, two vehicles were involved in an accident. One vehicle was driven by respondent Mario Laroya ("Laroya"), while the other vehicle was owned by petitioner Roberto Capitulo ("Capitulo") and driven by petitioner Avelino Casupanan ("Casupanan"). As a result of the accident, Laroya filed a criminal case against Casupanan for reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property. On the other hand, Casupanan and Capitulo filed a civil case against Laroya for quasi-delict.

At the time the civil case was filed, the criminal case was still at its preliminary investigation stage. Laroya filed a motion to dismiss the civil case on the grounds of forum shopping due to the pending criminal case. The motion was granted by the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), and the civil case was dismissed.

Casupanan and Capitulo filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the civil case is a separate civil action that can proceed independently of the criminal case. However, the MCTC denied the motion for reconsideration.

Casupanan and Capitulo then filed a petition for certiorari before the Regional Trial Court (Capas RTC), challenging the MCTC's order of dismissal. The Capas RTC dismissed the petition, stating that the proper remedy should have been an appeal since the MCTC's order was a final order disposing of the case. The Capas RTC also held that a special civil action for certiorari is not a substitute for a lost appeal. Casupanan and Capitulo filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was denied by the Capas RTC. Hence, this petition.

ISSUES:

1. Whether an accused in a pending criminal case for reckless imprudence can validly file, simultaneously and independently, a separate civil action for quasi-delict against the private complainant in the criminal case.

RULING:

1. Yes, the accused in a criminal case for reckless imprudence can validly file a separate and independent civil action for quasi-delict against the private complainant. The Court held that there was no forum-shopping because the law and rules expressly allow the filing of a separate civil action that can proceed independently of the criminal action. The civil action under Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code is not deemed instituted with the criminal action and may be filed separately by the offended party without reservation. The criminal case and the civil action for quasi-delict have different causes of action, and the civil action can proceed independently of the criminal action without violating the rule on non-forum shopping.

PRINCIPLES:

• Separate Civil Actions Independent civil actions based on Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code can proceed separately and independently of the criminal action without the need for any reservation in the criminal case.

• Forum Shopping The essence of forum shopping is the filing of multiple suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action to secure a favorable judgment. However, no forum-shopping exists where the law expressly allows independent civil actions to proceed simultaneously with criminal actions.

• Procedural Rules Procedural laws are retroactive and apply to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage.