View full case

HEIRS OF REDENTOR COMPLETO v. SGT. AMANDO C. ALBAYDA

FACTS:

Respondent Amando Albayda filed a complaint for damages against petitioners Redentor Completo and Elpidio Abiad. Albayda, who was riding his bicycle along 11th Street, was bumped and sideswiped by a taxi driven by Completo. Albayda suffered serious physical injuries and was hospitalized for several months. Albayda filed a complaint against Completo for physical injuries through reckless imprudence, while Completo filed a counter-charge against Albayda for damage to property through reckless imprudence. The Office of the City Prosecutor recommended the filing of an information against Completo. Albayda reserved his right to file a separate civil action for damages against Completo and Abiad. Albayda claimed that Completo's negligence caused the incident and sought actual damages, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. Completo argued that the incident was not his fault and that Albayda was negligent in riding his bicycle at a high speed. The case proceeded to trial with Albayda presenting witnesses who testified on the circumstances of the incident. Albayda testified that Completo hit the front tire of his bike causing him to fall and injure his left knee. Albayda was assisted by two individuals, including Dr. Barrosa, into the taxicab driven by Completo who brought him to PAFGH. Albayda suffered a fractured left knee and underwent multiple operations at AFPMC. Albayda claimed damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, moral damages, and attorney's fees. Completo denied responsibility and stated his employment as a taxi driver under FOJS Transport owned by Abiad.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the CA erred in finding that Completo was the one who caused the collision.

  2. Whether Abiad failed to prove that he observed the diligence of a good father of the family.

  3. Whether the award of moral and temperate damages and attorney's fees to Albayda had no basis.

  4. Whether or not Completo was negligent in driving the taxicab and if such negligence was the proximate cause of Albayda's injuries.

  5. Whether or not Abiad, as the employer of Completo, can be held liable for Completo's negligence.

  6. Whether temperate damages can be awarded when the pecuniary loss suffered cannot be proven with certainty.

  7. Whether the award of temperate damages in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) and moral damages in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) is reasonable.

  8. Whether an interest rate of six percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the temperate and moral damages until full payment.

  9. Whether attorney's fees should be awarded.

RULING:

  1. The petition is bereft of merit.

  2. Completo was found to be negligent in driving the taxicab and such negligence was the proximate cause of Albayda's injuries. The evidence presented showed that Completo was over-speeding at the time of the collision and did not slow down even when approaching the intersection. It was also proven that Albayda had the right of way.

  3. Abiad can be held liable for Completo's negligence. Under Article 2176 of the Civil Code, whoever causes damage to another by his fault or negligence is obliged to pay for the damage done. Under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, the obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions but also for those persons for whom one is responsible. The employer's responsibility ceases only upon proof that they observed all the diligence of a good father of the family in the selection and supervision of their employees. In this case, Abiad failed to meet this standard and therefore can be held liable for Completo's negligence.

  4. Yes, temperate damages can be awarded when the pecuniary loss suffered cannot be proven with certainty.

  5. Yes, the award of temperate damages in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) and moral damages in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) is proper and reasonable.

  6. Yes, an interest rate of six percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the temperate and moral damages from the date of the promulgation of the decision. Upon finality of the decision, an interest rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum shall be imposed on the amount of the temperate and moral damages until full payment.

  7. No, the award of attorney's fees is deleted for failure to prove that petitioners acted in bad faith in refusing to satisfy respondent's claim.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Conclusions and findings of fact of the trial court are entitled to great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless for strong and cogent reasons.

  • The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts and generally upholds the findings of fact of lower courts, unless there are clear and exceptional reasons to overturn them.

  • In negligence suits, the plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of evidence the defendant's breach in his duty of care, that the defendant was negligent in failing to exercise the required diligence, and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury suffered.

  • The duty of using reasonable care falls alike on a motorist and a bicyclist, but more care is required from the motorist due to the inherent differences in the two vehicles and the greater danger of harm that the motor vehicle poses to the bicyclist.

  • The employer is liable for the damages caused by their employees, but the employer's responsibility ceases only upon proof that they observed all the diligence of a good father of the family in the selection and supervision of their employees.

  • Employers are required to examine prospective employees as to their qualifications, experience, and service records. They should also formulate standard operating procedures, monitor their implementation, and impose disciplinary measures for breaches thereof.

  • Testimonial evidence alone is insufficient to overcome the legal presumption of negligence on the part of the employer. Concrete proof, including documentary evidence, must be presented.

  • Temperate damages may be awarded when the pecuniary loss suffered cannot be proven with certainty and must be reasonable under the circumstances.

  • Moral damages may be awarded in quasi-delicts causing physical injuries and are proper for permanent deformity and scars that serve as reminders of pain and suffering endured due to negligence.

  • An interest rate of six percent (6%) per annum is imposed on the temperate and moral damages from the date of the promulgation of the decision, and upon finality, an interest rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum is imposed until full payment.

  • Attorney's fees may be awarded if the petitioner acted in bad faith in refusing to satisfy the respondent's claim.