SPOUSES DIONISIO ESTRADA and JOVITA R.docx 203902

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

SPOUSES DIONISIO ESTRADA and JOVITA R. ESTRADA vs.

PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC. and EDUARDO R. SA YLAN


G.R. NO. 203902
July 19, 2017
FACTS:

On April 13, 2004, petitioners filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Urdaneta City,
Pangasinan, a Complaint5for Damages against Philippine Rabbit and respondent
Eduardo R. Saylan (Eduardo). A mishap occurred on April 9, 2002 along the national
highway in Barangay Alipangpang, Pozorrubio, Pangasinan, between the passenger
bus with plate number CVK-964 and body number 3101, driven by [respondent]
Eduardo Saylan and owned by [respondent] Philippine Rabbit Bus, Lines, Inc., and the
Isuzu truck with plate number UPB-974 driven by Willy U. Urez and registered in the
nan1e of Rogelio Cuyton, Jr.. At the time of the incident, the Philippine Rabbit Bus was
going towards the north direction, while the Isuzu truck was travelling towards the south
direction. The collision happened at the left lane or the lane properly belonging to the
Isuzu truck. The right front portion of the Isuzu Truck appears to have collided with the
right side portion of the body of the Philippine Rabbit bus. x x x Before the collision, the
bus was following closely a jeepney. When the jeepney stopped, the bus suddenly
swerved to the left encroaching upon the rightful lane of the Isuzu truck, which resulted
in the collision of the two (2) vehicles. x x x The [petitioner] Dionisio Estrada, who was
an1ong the passengers of the Philippine Rabbit bus, as evidenced by the ticket issued
to him, was injured on the [right] arm as a consequence of the accident. His injured right
arm was amputated at the Villaflor Medical Doctor's Hospital in Dagupan City x x x. For
the treatment of his injury, he incurred expenses as evidenced by x x x various receipts.
Dionisio argued that pursuant to the contract of carriage between him and Philippine
Rabbit, respondents were duty-bound to carry him safely as far as human care and
foresight can provide, with utmost diligence of a very cautious person, and with due
regard for all the circumstances from the point of his origin in Urdaneta City to his
destination in Pugo, La Union. However, through the fault and negligence of Philippine
Rabbit's driver, Eduardo, and without human care, foresight, and due regard for all
circumstances, respondents failed to transport him safely by reason of the
aforementioned collision which resulted in the amputation of Dionisio's right arm. And
since demands for Philippine Rabbit7 to pay him damages for the injury he sustained
remained unheeded, Dionisio filed the said complaint wherein he prayed for the
following awards: moral damages of ₱500,000.00 actual damages of ₱60,000.00, and
attorney's fees of ₱25,000.00.

ISSUE/S:
1. Whether or not there can be a recovery of moral damages from the breach of
contract in this case

RULING:

NO. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety,
besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar
injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be recovered if
they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act or omission. It has been
held, however, that "allegations of bad faith and fraud must be proved by clear and
convincing evidence."38 They are never presumed considering that they are serious
accusations that can be so conveniently and casually invoked. 39 And unless
convincingly substantiated by whoever is alleging them, they amount to mere slogans or
mudslinging.40 In this case, the fraud or bad faith that must be convincingly proved by
petitioners should be one which was committed by Philippine Rabbit in breaching its
contract of carriage with Dionisio. Unfortunately for petitioners, the Court finds no
persuasive proof of such fraud or bad faith.

There is no showing here that Philippine Rabbit induced Dionisio to enter into a contract
of carriage with the former through insidious machination. Neither is there any indication
or even an allegation of deceit or concealment or omission of a

You might also like