Scribd
Upload
209 views1 page

DE LIMA Vs LAGUNA TAYABAS CO

1) A bus collision in 1958 resulted in the death of one passenger and injuries to two others. The trial court awarded damages in 1963 but did not include legal interest. Petitioners sought reconsideration to include interest from the 1963 decision. 2) The issues were whether legal interest should run from the 1963 trial court decision rather than the 1972 appellate court decision, and whether indemnity for the death should be increased. 3) The court held that as the case had been pending for 30 years through no fault of petitioners, equitable relief was warranted. Legal interest should run from the 1963 decision to mitigate the impact of delay. The indemnity award was also increased given the lengthy delay caused by the appeal

Uploaded by

lancebryann
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
209 views1 page

DE LIMA Vs LAGUNA TAYABAS CO

1) A bus collision in 1958 resulted in the death of one passenger and injuries to two others. The trial court awarded damages in 1963 but did not include legal interest. Petitioners sought reconsideration to include interest from the 1963 decision. 2) The issues were whether legal interest should run from the 1963 trial court decision rather than the 1972 appellate court decision, and whether indemnity for the death should be increased. 3) The court held that as the case had been pending for 30 years through no fault of petitioners, equitable relief was warranted. Legal interest should run from the 1963 decision to mitigate the impact of delay. The indemnity award was also increased given the lengthy delay caused by the appeal

Uploaded by

lancebryann
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

DE LIMA vs LAGUNA TAYABAS CO

FACTS: A collision between a passenger bus of the Laguna Tayabas Bus Co. (LTB) and a delivery truck
of the Seven-up Bottling Co. of the Philippines which took place on June 3, 1958 resulting in the death of
Petra de la Cruz and serious physical injuries of Eladia de Lima and Nemesio Flores, all passengers of
the LTB bus. Petitioners moved for a reconsideration of this decision 4 seeking its modification so that the
legal interest awarded by the Appellate, Court will start to run from the date of the decision of the trial
court on December 27, 1963 instead of January 31, 1972. The Appellate Court denied the motion for
reconsideration holding that since the plaintiffs did not appeal from the failure of the court a quo to award
interest on the damages and that the court on its own discretion.

ISSUE: 1) Whether or not the Court of Appeal; erred in granting legal interest on damages to start only
from the date of its decision instead of from the date of the trial court's decision;2) Whether or not the
Court of Appeals erred in not increasing the indemnity for the death of Petra de La Cruz

HELD: It is true that a party who does not appeal from the decision may not obtain any affirmative relief
from the appellate court other than what he has obtained from the lower court, if any, whose decision is
brought up on appeal. We take note of the fact that petitioners are litigating as paupers. Although they
may not have appealed, they had filed their motion for reconsideration with the court a quo  which
unfortunately did not act on it. By reason of their indigence, they failed to appeal but petitioners De Lima
and Requijo had filed their manifestation making reference to the law and jurisprudence upon which they
base their prayer for relief while petitioner Flores filed his brief. Pleadings as well as remedial laws should
be construed liberally in order that the litigants may have ample opportunity to pursue their respective
claims and that a possible denial of substantial justice due to legal technicalities may be
avoided.Moreover, under the circumstances of this case where the heirs of the victim in the traffic
accident chose not to appeal in the hope that the transportation company will pay the damages awarded
by the lower court but unfortunately said company still appealed to the Court of Appeals, which step was
obviously dilatory and oppressive of the rights of the said claimants: that the case had been pending in
court for about 30 years from the date of the accident in 1958 so that as an exception to the general rule
aforestated, the said heirs who did not appeal the judgment, should be afforded equitable relief by the
courts as it must be vigilant for their protection. 12The claim for legal interest and increase in the indemnity
should be entertained in spite of the failure of the claimants to appeal the judgment. We take exception to
the ruling of the Appellate Court as to the date when the legal interest should commence to ran. In view of
the consistent rulings of this Court, We hold that the legal interest of six percent (6) 13 on the amounts
adjudged in favor of petitioners should start from the time of the rendition of the trial court's decision on
December 27, 1963 instead of January 31, 1972, the promulgation of the decision of the Court of
Appeals.

As to the second issue; If the transportation company had only accepted the judgment of the trial court
and paid its just awards instead of appealing the same to the Court of Appeals, no further delay would
have been occasioned on the simple issue of interest and indemnity. To mitigate the impact of such a
great delay in this case the Court finds ample justification in the aforesaid award for interest and
indemnity. We hope this relief is not too late.

You might also like