Santos v. Republic| G.R. No. 250520| May 05, 2021| Caguioa, J. use of his true and official name.

ue and official name." These were not present on the case. (Check
Gusto ni Luigi palitan into Revilla apelyido niya to avoid confusion, and grounds sa taas)
associate himself to the Revilla. E adopted siya by Santos at ito gamit niya
mula nung college, pati sa mga records at documents niya. Kilala rin siya as The Family Codeprovisions on Adoption were superseded by R.A. 8552.
Kugigi Santos, though aware naman mga tao na Revilla siya, pero di niya Under Article V, sec. 16 of RA 8552:
pinalitan eto from 1996 nung ni-ackowledged siya as Revilla.
SEC. 16. Parental Authority - Except in cases where the biological parent is
Convenience not a ground for change of name. It is only a privilege and not the spouse of the adopter, all legal ties between the biological parent(s) andthe
a matter of right. adoptee shall be severed and the same shall then be vested on theadopter(s).

FACTS: As held in Republic v. Court of Appeals, it may be inferred from the very
wording of the law "that the use of the surname of the adopter by the adopted
This case is a petition for change of name underRule 103 of the Rules of child is both an obligation and a right.
Court seeking to change his surname from "Santos" to"Revilla" in his
Certificate of Live Birth. (to "avoid confusion, xxx to show [his] sincere and He also remains to be the legitimate son of Patrick Santos by virtue of the
genuine desire to associate himself to [Bong] Revilla, Jr. and to the Revillas, x adoption.
x xto show that he accepts and embraces his true identity," and "to show his
true and genuine love to his biological father.) The Court agrees with the RTC that the use of the surname "Revilla" would
createfurther confusion rather than avoid it, given that: (1) petitioner has never
Luigi Santos is the biological child of Lovely Guzman and Bong Revilla, but legally usedthe name "Revilla" despite having been acknowledged in 1996;
they were not married since Bong was already married to Lani Mercado. That (2) he was legallyadopted by Patrick Santos in 2001; (3) he has used the name
in 1996, Luigi was acknowledged by Bong as his son. "Santos" for alldocumentary purposes since his adoption; (4) although he is
publicly known to be theson of Bong Revilla, he is known by his peers as
In 1999, Lovely married Patrick Santos who legally adopted Luigi and caused "Luigi Santos"; (5) even after a changeof surname, Patrick Santos shall
his name to be changed from Francis Luigi Guzman to Santos. continue to be the father named in his birth certificate; and (5) he only began
using the surname "Revilla" when he entered show business.
That Luigi used the surname Revilla when he entered show business.
Republic v. Felix| G.R. No. 203371, June 30, 2020| Lazaro-Javier, J.
Initially, the RTC found Luigi’s petition sufficient in form and substance but Ni-order kasi ng RTC sa Benguet na i-cancel 2nd BC ni Charlie as
was timely opposed by the Republic through the OSG. In 2018, the RTC Caranglan, NE.
denied the petition and held that a change ofname was not a matter of right
and could be granted only for compelling reasons. 2001 yung RA 9048 tapos 2012 amended by RA 11072, pero di na-divest ang
RTC ng jurisdiction maski di na-exhaust administrative remedies. Ang
This was affirmed by the CA and held that allowinga change of name would effect lang e baka mawalan ng cause of action kasi condition precedent
create more confusion as to petitioner's status and filiationgiven that he had siya.
already been legally adopted by Patrick Santos.
FACTS:
The CA held that petitioner should have availed himself of the adversarial
proceeding under Rule 108 for cancellation and/or correction of entries rather In his Petition for Correction of Entries dated July 30, 2007, respondent
than the summary proceeding under Rule 103 (publication lang, no need Charlie Mintas a.k.a. Shirley Mintas Felixessentially alleged that he was born
implead mga interested parties) for change of name. Further, the CA held that on October 1, 1976 in Itogon, Benguet. his birth was registered with the
the proceedings were void under Section 3, Rule 108 for failure to implead LocalCivil Registrar (LCR)-Itogin, Benguet where his birth certificate bore
indispensable parties. the following erroneous entries: his first name"Shirley" instead of "Charlie,"
his gender "female" instead of "male," and his father's surname "Filex" instead
ISSUE: of"Felix". but he has another birth certificate carried the correct entries" his
first name as Charlie, his gender as male, and his father's surname as "Felix".
Whether or not the CA erred (1) in holding that Rule 108 rather than Rule 103
applies (YES) and (2) in denying the petition to change petitioner's surname That he prayed for correction of his birth certificate with the LCR-Itogon,
from "Santos" to "Revilla" (NO). Benguet and cancellation of his second birth certificate with the LCR-
Carranglan, Nueva Ecija.
RULING: Petition DISMISSED
The RTC granted his petition and ordered the Local Registrar of Caranglan to
1. Petitioner correctly availed of a Rule 103 proceeding to effect the desired cancel from its record the registration of the facts of birth of Charlie Mintas
change. Contrary to the findings of the CA, Rule 108 is inapplicable as Felix.
petitioner does not allege or identify any erroneous entry that requires
substantial rectification or cancellation. On appeal, the Republic said that the RTC had no jurisdiction to order the
LCR-Carranglan, Nueva Ecija to cancel respondent's second birth registration.
Jurisprudence has recognized, inter alia , the following grounds as being The CA nevertheless affirmed thatbthe RTC has jurisdiction and the
sufficient to warrant a change of name: (a) when the name is cancellation of his second birth certificate with the LCR-Carranglan, Nueva
ridiculous,dishonorable or extremely difficult to write or pronounce; (b) when Ecija was merely incidental to and a necessary consequence of his action for
thechange results as a legal consequence of legitimation or adoption; (c) correction of entries.
whenthe change will avoid confusion; (d) when one has continuously used
andbeen known since childhood by a Filipino name and was unaware of ISSUE:
alienparentage; (e) when the change is based on a sincere desire to adopt
aFilipino name to erase signs of former alienage, all in good faith and Whether or not RA 9048 as amended by RA 10172 divest the regional trial
withoutprejudice to anybody; and (f) when the surname causes embarrassment courts of jurisdiction over petitions for correction of entries in the civil
andthere is no showing that the desired change of name was for a fraudulent registry. (NO)
purpose or that the change of name would prejudice public interest.
RULING: Petition DISMISSED
Rule 103 procedurally governs judicial petitions for change of given name
orsurname, or both, pursuant to Article 376 of the Civil Code. It is settled that jurisdiction over the main case embraces all incidental matters
arising therefrom and connectedtherewith under the doctrine of ancillary
In petitions for change of name, a person avails of a remedy to alter jurisdiction.
the"designation by which he is known and called in the community in which
helives and is best known." It is also an action in rem which The trial court has jurisdiction, as well, to direct the cancellation of
requirespublication of the order issued by the court to afford the State and all respondent'ssecond birth certificate with the LCR-Carranglan, Nueva Ecija as
otherinterested parties to oppose the petition. When complied with, the an incident or as a necessary consequence of theaction to correct the entries
decisionbinds not only the parties impleaded but the whole world. sought by respondent.

The "change of name" contemplated under Article 376 and Rule 103 mustnot To file two (2) separate petitions, one for correction of entries in his first birth
be confused with Article 412 and Rule 108. certificate with the LCR-Itogon, Benguet and two, for cancellation of his
second birth certificate with LCR-Carranglan, Nueva Ecija --- willcertainly
NOTE: violate the rule against multiplicity of suits.

In 2012, R.A. 10172 expanded the coverage of the summaryadministrative More important, a petition for correction is an action in rem. A decision
procedure provided under R.A. 9048 to include clerical corrections in theday therein binds not only the parties themselvesbut the whole world, as well. An
and/or month in the date of birth, or in the sex of the person, where it is in rem proceeding entails publication as a jurisdictional requirement--- to give
patentlyclear that there was a clerical or typographical error or mistake in notice to and bring the whole world as a party into the case.
the entry. Presently therefore, when an entry falls within the coverage of R.A.
9048 as amendedby R.A. 10172, a person may only avail of the appropriate Verily, even with the advent of RA 9048, as amended by RA 10172
judicial remedies under Rule103 or Rule 108 after the petition in the prescribing the administrative remedy forcorrection of entries with the civil
administrative proceedings is first filed and later denied. (Exhaustion of registry, the regional trial courts are not divested of their jurisdiction to hear
admin remedies and Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction and decide petitions for correction of entries "Even the failure to observe the
doctrine of exhaustion of administrativeremedies does not affect the
2. There is no compellingreason to grant the change of surname. jurisdiction of the court."

To justify a change of name however, a person "must show not only some
proper or compelling reason x x x but also that he will be prejudiced by the
Republic v. Sali| G.R. No. 206023| April 03, 2017| Peralta, J. 9048. As modified, Section 1 now includes the day and month inthe date of
Section 1 of RA 9048 now governs the change of first name. It vests the birth and sex of a person.
power and authority toentertain petitions for change of first name to the city
or municipal civil registrar or consul generalconcerned. Under the law, Considering that Sali filed her petition in 2008, Rule 108 is the appropriate
therefore, jurisdiction over applications for change of first name is now remedy in seekingto correct her date of birth in the civil registry. The
primarily lodged with the aforementioned administrative officers. The intent Republic did not question the petition to correctSali's birth date from "June
and effect of the law is toexclude the change of first name from the 24, 1968" to "April 24, 1968." In fact, it did not contest the CA ruling thatthe
coverage of Rules 103 (Change of Name) and 108(Cancellation or requirements for an appropriate adversarial proceeding were satisfactorily
Correction of Entries in the Civil Registry) of the Rules of Court, until and complied with.
unless anadministrative petition for change of name is first filed and
subsequently denied The Petition forCorrection of Entry in the Certificate of Live Birth of Dorothy
A. Omapas with respect toher first name is DISMISSED WITHOUT
FACTS: PREJUDICE to its filing with the local civilregistrar concerned.

Lorena Omapas Sali filed a Petition for Correction of Entry under Rule 108 of Republic v. Unabia| G.R. No. 213346| February 11, 2019| Del Castillo, J.
the Rules ofCourt before the RTC. In her petition, she averred that in Typo lang, R at U lang papalitan. Maraming documentary evidences nan a-
recording the facts of her birth, thepersonnel of the Local Civil Registrar of present.
Baybay, Leyte, erroneously entered in the records thefollowing: Firstly, the
first name of the petitioner as "DOROTHY" instead of "LORENA" and No need na i-identify at authenticate ni Dr. Labis yug med cert kasi public
Secondly, the date of birth of the petitioner as "June 24, 1968" instead of document na yun at na issue in his official duty.
" April 24, 1968. The petitioner hasbeen using the name "Lorena A.
FACTS:
Omapas” and her date of birth as "April 24, 1968" for as long as shecould
remember and is known to the community in general as such. Respondent Miller Omandam Unabia filed a "Petition for Correction of
Entries on the Birth Certificate of Mellie Umandam Unabia,"4 claiming that
The trial court ruled in favor of Lorena Sali thereby granting the petition to
his Birth Certificate5 contained errors in that the name entered therein was
correct theerroneous entries in her birth certificate. However, The Republic,
"Mellie Umandam Unabia", when it should properly have been written as
through the Office of the SolicitorGeneral (OSG), appealed the RTC Decision
"Miller Omandam Unabia"; that the gender was erroneously entered as
for lack of jurisdiction on the part of the court a quo because the title of the
"female" instead of "male"; and that his father's middle initial was erroneously
petition and the order setting the petition for hearing did not contain Sali’s
indicated as "U" when it should have been "O". In support of the petition,
aliases.
respondent attached the following documentary evidence to the petition:
The CA denied the appeal, ruling that: (1) the records are bereft of any
1. Medical Certificate;
indication that Sali is knownby a name other than "Lorena," hence, it would 2. Police Clearance;
be absurd to compel her to indicate any other aliasthat she does not have; (2) 3. Voter's Identification;
Sali not only complied with the mandatory requirements for anappropriate 4. Baptismal Certificate;
adversarial proceeding under Rule 108 of the Rules but also gave the Republic 5. National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Clearance;
anopportunity to timely contest the purported defective petition; and (3) the 6. Transcript of Records;
change in the first nameof Sali will certainly avoid further confusion as to her 7. Mother's Birth Certificate; and
identity and there is no showing that it wassought for a fraudulent purpose or 8. Father's Birth Certificate.
that it would prejudice public interest.
That the RTC granted Unabia’s petition where he was able to prove that there
Hence, the appeal to SC. was no instance that petitioner used the name Mellie Umandam Unabia.
Likewise, to bolster his claim that he is a male and not a female, petitioner
ISSUE: subjected himself to a medical examination. That he has no derogatory record
as per NBI.
Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred on a question of law when it
applied Rule 108 instead of Rule 103, thereby dispensing with the requirement That there is a need to correct the erroneous entries in the birth certificate
of stating the respondent’s aliases in the title of the petition. (NO) ofpetitioner to avoid confusion to his person. The correction is also
necessaryto reveal his true identity as not to create doubt as to his person.
Whether or not respondent failed to exhaust administrative remedies. (YES,
on the 1st name) Petitioner appealed before the CA, arguing that respondent failed to state a
valid ground for change of name; that the petition failed to state the aliases by
RULING: Petition partially granted which respondent was known (Wala naman); that respondent failed to exhaust
administrative remedies (Di pa applicable un); and that respondent failed to
1.) Sali's petition is not for a change of name as contemplated under Rule 103 present the physician who allegedly issued the medical certificate stating that
of the Rulesbut for correction of entries under Rule 108. What she seeks is the respondent was male (No need).
correction of clerical errors whichwere committed in the recording of her
name and birth date. This Court has held that not allalterations allowed in ISSUE:
one's name are confined under Rule 103 and that corrections for clerical
Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC’s decision granting
errorsmay be set right under Rule 108. The evidence presented by Sali show
Unabia’s petition for correction of entries. (NO)
that, since birth, she has beenusing the name "Lorena." Thus, it is apparent
that she never had any intention to change her name. What she seeks is simply
the removal of the clerical fault or error in her first name, and to set arightthe RULING: Petition DENIED
same to conform to the name she grew up with.
When Special Proceeding No. 2009-018 was filed in 2009, the governing law
2.) YES on the part of Sali’s first name but NO on the part of her birth date. then was the original, unamended RA 9048. There was no provision then for
the administrativecorrection or change of clerical or typographical errors or
At the time Sali'spetition was filed, R.A. No. 9048 was already in effect.
mistakes in the civil registryentries of the day and month in the date of birth or
Section 1 of RA 9048 now governs the changeof first name. It vests the power
sex of individuals, but only clericalor typographical errors and change of first
and authority to entertain petitions for change of first name to thecity or
names or nicknames. Administrativecorrections or changes relating to the date
municipal civil registrar or consul general concerned. Under the law,
of birth or sex of individuals was authorizedonly with the passage in 2012 of
therefore, jurisdictionover applications for change of first name is now
RA 10172.
primarily lodged with the aforementionedadministrative officers. The intent
and effect of the law is to exclude the change of first name fromthe coverage Petitioner questions the Medical Certificate issued by Dr. Labis, claiming that
of Rules 103 (Change of Name) and 108 (Cancellation or Correction of itfailed to include a certification that respondent "has not undergone sex
Entries in theCivil Registry) of the Rules of Court, until and unless an change or sextransplant" as required by Section 5 of RA 9048, as amended,
administrative petition for change of name isfirst filed and subsequently and that Dr. Labis was not presented in court in order that his qualifications
denied. It likewise lays down the corresponding venue, form andprocedure. In may be established and so that hemay identify and authenticate the medical
sum, the remedy and the proceedings regulating change of first name are certificate.
primarilyadministrative in nature, not judicial.
However, the said Medical Certificate is a public document (self-
In Republic v. Cagandahan , we said that under R.A. No. 9048, the correction authenticating), the same having been issued by a public officer in
of clerical ortypographical errors can now be made through administrative theperformance of official duty; as such, it constitutes prima facie evidence of
proceedings and without the need fora judicial order. The law removed from the factstherein stated. Under Section 23, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court,
the ambit of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court the correction ofclerical or "[d]ocumentsconsisting of entries in public records made in the performance
typographical errors. Thus petitioner can avail of this administrative remedy of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
for thecorrection of his and his mother's first name. stated. All other public documentsare evidence, even against a third person, of
the fact which gave rise to their executionand of the date of the latter."
In this case, the petition, insofar as it prayed for the change of Sali's first
name, was not withinthe RTC's primary jurisdiction. It was improper because He was conceived and born male, he looks male, and he functions biologically
the remedy should have beenadministrative, i.e. , filing of the petition with the as a male. (Phenotypically Male - meaning that respondent's entire physical,
local civil registrar concerned. For failure to exhaustadministrative remedies, physiological, and biochemical makeup - as determined both genetically
the RTC should have dismissed the petition to correct Sali's first name. andenvironmentally - is male, which thus presupposes that he did not undergo
sexreassignment.)
On the other hand, anent Sali's petition to correct her birth date from "June 24,
1968" to "April24, 1968," R.A. No. 9048 is inapplicable. It was only on Suffice it to state that, as correctly declared by the CA, respondent was
August 15, 2012 that R.A. No. 10172 wassigned into law amending R.A. No. actually using the name Miller Omandam Unabia; that "Miller" and "Mellie"
and "Omandam" and"Umandam" were confusingly similar; and that Whether or not petitioner is liable for damages for the deliberate act of his
respondent's medical certificate showsthat he is phenotypically male. The CA minor son. (YES)
thus properly held that respondent's birthcertificate contained clerical errors in
its entries necessitating its rectification. RULING: Petition DENIED (Halos same sa previous case)

Salen v. Balce| G.R. No. L-14414|April 27, 1960| Bautista Angelo, J. The civil liability which the law imposes upon the father and, in case of his
May parental subsidiary liability sa criminal act ng isang minor na anak. Di death or incapacity, the mother, forany damages that may be caused by the
porke wala specifically sa RPC e wala na. minor children who live with them, is obvious. This is a
necessaryconsequence of the parental authority they exercise over them which
Arrt 2180 ng Civ Code ang applicable at hindi lang ito limited sa mga quasi- imposes upon the parents the "duty ofsupporting them, keeping them in their
delicts company, educating them in proportion to their means"

FACTS: Additionally, since children and wards do not yet have the capacity to govern
themselves, the law imposes upon theparents and guardians the duty of
Plaintiffs are the legitimate parents of Carlos Salen who died from wounds exercising special vigilance over the acts of their children and wards inorder
caused by Gumersindo Balce, a legitimate son of defendant who was then that damages to third persons due to the ignorance, lack of foresight or
single, 18 yrs old and was living with defendant. discernment of such childrenand wards may be avoided. If the parents and
guardians fail to comply with this duty, they should suffer theconsequences of
As a result of Carlos Salen’s death, Gumersindo Balce was accused and their abandonment or negligence by repairing the damage caused"
convicted of homicide and was sentenced to imprisonment and to pay the
amount of 2k. Plaintiffs brought this action against defendant before CFI to Moreover, the case at bar was decided by the Court of Appeals on the basis of
recover the sum of 2k, with legal interest. the evidence submitted therein byboth parties, independently of the criminal
case. And responsibility for fault or negligence under Article 2176 uponwhich
Defendant, in his answer, set up the defense that the law (Art. 2180) upon the action in the present case was instituted, is entirely separate and distinct
which plaintiffs predicate their right to recover does not here apply for the from the civil liability arising fromfault of negligence under the Penal Code
reason that law refers to quasi delicts and not to criminal cases. (Art. 2177), and having in mind the reasons behind the law as
heretoforestated, any discussion as to the minor's criminal responsibility is of
CFI sustained the theory of defendant.
no moment.
ISSUE:
Exconde v. Capuno| G.R. No. L-10134| June 29, 1957| Bautista Angelo, J.
Whether or not appellee can be held subsidiary liable to pay the indemnity in Ni-drive ni Dante yung jeep during parade, it turned turtle at namatay sina
accordance with Art. 2180 of the Civil Code. (YES) Ticzon at Caperiño. Di raw liable teacher/head as per Spanish Code kasi di
naman siya student ng trade and arts. Si father pa rin niya raw. (See
RULING: Decision appealed from REVERSED Sepaate Opinion)

Jose Balce is ordered to pay the indemnity. FACTS:

As a rule, the civil liability arising form a crime shall be governed by the Dante Capuno, a minor of 15 years of age, lives in the company of his father,
RPC. But since the RPC is silent as to the subsidiary liability of parents for a Delfin Capuno. He is a studentof the Balintawak Elementary School in the
minor over 15, who acts with discernment, resort should be made to the City of San Pablo and a member of the Boy Scout Organization ofhis school.
general law which is the Civil Code. And Art.2180 is the law that applies. To
hold that Art. 2180 applies only to quasi-delicts will result in an absurdity that On Marcy 31, 1949, on the occasion of a certain parade in honor of Dr. Jose
while for an act where mere negligence intervenes, the father or mother may Rizal in the City ofSan Pablo, Dante Capuno was one of those instructed by
be held subsidiarily liable, no liability would attach if the damage is caused the City School Supervisor to join the parade. Fromthe school, Dante Capuno,
with criminal intent. The void that apparently exists in the RPC is subserved together with other students, boarded a jeep. When the jeep started to run,
by 2180 of the Civil Code as may be gleaned from some recent SC decisions. Dante Capuno took hold of the wheel and drove it while the driver sat on his
left side. They have not gone far when the jeep turned turtle and two of its
It is true that under Art. 101 of the Revised Penal Code, a father is made passengers, Amando Ticson and Isidro Caperina died as a consequence.
civilly liable for the acts committedby his son only if the latter is an imbecile,
an insane, under 9 years of age, or over 9 but under 15 years ofage, who acts The corresponding criminal action for double homicide through reckless
without discernment, unless it appears that there is no fault or negligence on imprudence was instituted against Dante Capuno. During the trial, Sabina
his part. This isbecause a son who commits the act under any of those Exconde, as mother of the deceased Isidro Caperina, reserved her right to
conditions is by law exempt from criminal liability (Article 12, subdivisions 1, bring a separate civil action for damages against the accused. Dante Capuno
2 and 3, Revised Penal Code). The idea is not to leave the act entirely was found guilty of the criminal offense charged against him. In line with said
unpunishedbut to attach certain civil liability to the person who has the reservation of Sabina Exconde, the corresponding civil action for damages
delinquent minor under his legal authority or control. But a minor over 15 was filed against Delfin Capuno and Dante Capuno.
who acts with discernment is not exempt from criminal liability, for which
Delfin set up the defense that Dante was not, at the time of the incident under
reasonthe Code is silent as to the subsidiary liability of his parents should he
his control, supervision and custody which the Trial Court agreed with.
stand convicted. In that case, resortshould be had to the general law which is
our Civil Code. Upon appeal, plaintiff argued that Delfin should be jointly and severally liable
since at the time of the incident, he was a minot and living with him.
Article 2180, the pertinent portion of which provides: "The father and, in case
of his death or incapacity, the mother, are responsible for damages caused by ISSUE:
the minor children who live in their company.".
Whether or not defendant Delfin Capuno can be held civilly liable, jointly and
Fuellas v. Cadano| G.R. No. L-14409| October 31, 1961| Paredes, J. severally with his son Dante, for damages resulting from the death of Isidoro
Na-fracture ima ni Pepito dahil sinakal at sinakyan siya ni Rico matapos Caperiña caused by the negligent act of minor Dante Capuno. (YES)
niya itong itinumba.
RULING: Decision MODIFIED
May subsidiary liability si Tatay ni Fuellase pursuant to par. 2 of Art. 2180
of the Civil Code, in connection with Art. 2176 of the same. The case comes under Article 1903 of the Spanish Civil Code, paragraph 1
and 5, which provides:
FACTS:
ART. 1903. The obligation impossed by the next preceding articles is
Pepito Cadano and Rico Fuellas, son of defendant-appellant Agapito Fuellas, enforceable not only for personal acts and omissions, but also for those of
were both 13 years old and were classmates at St. Mary's High School. persons for whom another is responsible.
While Pepito was studying his lessons in the classroom, Rico took the pencil The father, and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are liable for
of one Ernesto Cabanok andsurreptitiously placed it inside the pocket of any damages caused by the minor children who live with them.
Pepito. When Ernesto asked Rico to return the pencil, it was Pepito
whoreturned the same, an act which angered Rico, who held the neck of Finally, teachers or directors of arts and trades are liable for any damages
Pepito and pushed him to the floor. Their teacher separated them and told caused by their pupils or apprentices while they are under their custody.
them to go home.
It is true that under the law above quoted, "teachers or directors of arts and
However, when Pepitohad just gone down of the schoolhouse, he was met by trades areliable for any damages caused by their pupils or apprentices while
Rico, still in an angry mood. Pepito offered to shake hands but Ricoheld they are under their custody", but this provisiononly applies to an institution
Pepito by the neck and with his leg, placed Pepito out of balance and pushed of arts and trades and not to any academic educational institution.
him to the ground. This has caused his fracture in his radius and ulna of his
right forearam. At the last day of hearing, same arm was already shorter than Here Dante capuno was then a student of theBalintawak Elementary School
the other. and as part of his extra-curricular activity, he attended the parade in honor of
Dr. Jose Rizal upon instruction of the city school's supervisor. And it was in
Elpidio filed two separate actions for serious physical injuries suffered by his connection with that parade that Danteboarded a jeep with some companions
son which the trail court rules in his favor with the award of damages. The CA and while driving it, the accident occurred. In the circumstances, it is clearthat
modified it to reduce the award of moral damages. neither the head of that school, nor the city school's supervisor, could be held
liable for the negligent act ofDante because he was not then a student of an
ISSUE: institute of arts and trades as provided by law.
SEPARATE OPINION: Reyes, JBL., J. kanila si Reginald kahit pa emancipated na siya bymarriage. Sustento e
nasa magulang pa rin naman. Need pa rin nga consent sa disposal
After mature consideration I believe we should affirm the judgement relieving properties pati judicial litigations e.
the father of liability. I can see nosound reason for limiting Art. 1903 of the
old Civil Code to teachers of arts and trades and not to academic ones. What FACTS:
substantial difference is there between them in so far as, concerns the proper
supervision and vigilance overtheir pupils? It cannot be seriously contended Reginald Hill, the respondent in this case, killed the son of the plaintiffs
that an academic teacher is exempt from the duty of watching do notcommit a named Agapito Elcano. Subsequently, a criminal complaint was instituted
tort to the detriment of third persons, so long as they are in a position to against him based onthe abovementioned killing. Nevertheless, he was
exercise authority and supervisionover the pupil. In my opinion, in the phrase acquitted on the ground that his actwas not criminal, because of "lack of intent
"teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades" used in Art.1903 of to kill, coupled with mistake. After the said judgment, plaintiffs filed a
the old Civil Code, the words "arts and trades" does not qualify "teachers" but complaint in order to recover damages against the samedefendant Reginald
only "heads ofestablishments". Hill who is a minor, and was married at the time of the occurrence ofthe crime
alleged he had committed. His father, on the other hand, is Marvin Hill,
I submit that the father should not be held liable for a tort that he was in no withwhom he is living and to whom he is getting subsistence.
way able to prevent, andwhich he had every right to assume the school
authorities would avoid. Having proved that he trusted his child to thecustody Thereafter, a motion to dismiss was filed by the defendants. However, the
of school authorities that were competent to exercise vigilance over him, the Court of FirstInstance denied the Motion to dismiss. Upon motion for
father has rebutted thepresumption of Art. 1903 and the burden of proof reconsideration by the defendants, petitioner’s action for recovery of damages
shifted to the claimant to show actual negligence on the part of theparent in was dismissed. Hence, petitioner appealed before the SC.
order to render him liable.
ISSUE/S:
In the case before us, there is no question that the pupil, Dante Capuno, was
instructed by the City SchoolSupervisor to attend the Rizal parade. His father 1. Whether or not the present civil action for damages is barred by the
could not properly refuse to allow the child to attend, in defiance ofthe school acquittal ofReginald in the criminal case. (NO)
authorities. The father had every reason to assume that in ordering a minor to
2. Whether or not Article 2180 of the Civil Code may be applied against Atty.
attend a parade with otherchildren, the school authorities would provide
Hill, notwithstanding the undisputed fact that at the time of the occurrence
adequate supervision over them.
complained of, Reginald is living with and getting subsistence from his father,
On the other hand, if no teacher or master was at hand to watch over the though still a minor andwas already legally married. (YES)
pupils, the school authorities are the ones answerable for that negligence, and
RULING:
not the father
1.) No, the present civil action for damages is not barred by the acquittal of
Cuadra v. Monfort| G.R. No. L-2410| September 30, 1970| Makalintal, J.
Reginald in thecriminal case. Under Article 2177 of the New Civil Code,
Natamaan right eye ni Cuadra nung nagjoke si Monfort na may nakita
responsibility for fault ornegligence is entirely separate and distinct from the
siyang at nagging cause ng kanyang pagkabulag.
civil liability arising from negligenceunder the Penal Code, provided, that the
Kaso exempted daw Father ni Cuadra kasi ay “diligence of a good father.” plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the
Innocent prank din daw yun na commo sa mga bata. (NGEK. Kbail ko defendant. There is a distinction as regards the proof requiredin a criminal
Dissenting opinion) case and a civil case. To find the accused guilty in a criminal case, proof
ofguilt beyond reasonable doubt is required, while in a civil case,
FACTS: preponderance ofevidence is sufficient to make the defendant pay in damages.
Furthermore, a civil casefor damages on the basis of quasi-delict does is
Maria Teresa Cuadra, 12 years oId, and Maria Teresa Monfort, 13 years oId independently instituted from a criminalact. As such, although there is an
were both cIassmates in Mabini EIementary SchooI BacoIod City, Grade 6. In acquittal of Reginald Hill in the criminal case, it doesnot extinguished his
JuIy 1962, their teacher assigned the cIass to weed the schooI premises. WhiIe liability for quasi-delict. Therefore, the acquittal is not a bar to theinstant
they were doing so, MT Monfort found a headband and she johingIy shouted action against him.
it as an earthworm and thereafter tossed it at MT Cuadra who was hit in her
eye. 2.) Yes, the above mentioned provision may still be applied against Atty.
Marvin Hill. Under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, the obligation imposed by
Cuadra’s eye got infected. She was brought to the hospitaI and stayed for 23 article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also
days; her eyes were attempted to be surgicaIIy repaired but she nevertheIess for those of persons for whom one isresponsible. Although parental authority
got bIind in her right eye. is terminated upon emancipation of the child, emancipation by marriage is not
absolute. In the instant case, Reginald Hill was livingwith his father and
Cuadra’s parents sued AIfonso Monfort (MT Monfort’s dad) based on ArticIe getting subsistence from him at the time of the occurrence of thealleged crime
2180 of the CiviI Code. The Iower court ruIed that Monfort shouId pay for in question. Therefore, Reginald was still subservient to and dependent onhis
actuaI damages (cost of hospitaIization), moraI damages and attorney’s fees. father, a situation which is not unusual.

ISSUE: However, in asmuch as it is evident thateginald is now of age, as a matter of

equity, the liability of Atty. Hill has becomesubsidiary to that of his son.
Whether or not Monfort’s father is IiabIe under ArticIes 2176 and 2180. (NO
raw) Tamargo v. CA| G.R. No. 85044 June 3, 1992| Feliciano, J.
Natural parents want to pass liability to adoptive parents for son’s shooting
RULING: incident, e nasa US sila that time, walang physical custody kahit pa sabihin
natin na effective yung adoption decree from the time of its filing.
In the case at bar there is nothing from which it may be inferred that AIfonso
Prejudicial sa part nila, kaya di pwede.
Monfort couId have prevented the damage by the observance of due care, or
that he was in any way remiss in the exercise of his parentaI authority in Natural parents pa rin ang indispensable parties, who are on the court that
faiIing to foresee such damage, or the act which caused it. time. Dapat di dismissed.
On the contrary, his chiId was at schooI, where it was his duty to send her and FACTS:
where she was, as he had the right to expect her to be, under the care and
supervision of the teacher. And as far as the act which caused the injury was December 10, 1981: Sabas & Felisa Rapisura filed a petition to adopt
concerned, it was an innocent pranh not unusuaI among chiIdren at pIay and Adelberto Bundoc. Then, on October 20, 1982: Adelberto Bundoc, then 10
which no parent, however carefuI, wouId have any speciaI reason to anticipate years old, shot Jennifer Tamargo with an air rifle. Her parents filed civil and
much Iess guard against. Nor did it reveaI any mischievous propensity, or criminal charges2 against Bundoc.
indeed any trait in the chiId’s character which wouId reflect unfavorabIy on
her upbringing and for which the bIame couId be attributed to her parents. November 18, 1982: Petition for adoption was granted. Now, Bundoc’s
natural parents argued that it was not they, but the adopting parents, the
DISSENTING OPINION: Barredo, J. Rapisuras, who should be the indispensable parties to the case, since parental
authority has already shifted from the moment the petition was filed before
I am afraid I cannot go along with my esteemed colleagues in holding that the the shooting occured. They relied on Art. 363 and 39 (2)4 of the Child and
act of appellant's daughter does notconstitute fault within the contemplation of Youth Welfare Code.
our law or torts. She was 13 years and should have known that by jokingly
saying "aloud that she had found an earthworm and, evidently to frighten the The Tamargos argued that Bundoc was living with his natural parents at that
Cuadra girl, tossed the objectat her," it was likely that something would time, and that parental authority was not relinquished due to the filing and
happen to her friend, as in fact, she was hurt. granting of petition.

As to the liability of appellant as father, I prefer to hold that there being no The trial court ruled in favor of the Bundocs and denied the motion for
evidence that he had properly advised hisdaughter to behave properly and not reconsideration. Notice of appeal was then filed at the trial court but was
to play dangerous jokes on her classmate and playmates, he can be liableunder denied as it was filed beyond 15day reglementary period on December 22,
Article 2180 of the Civil Code. There is nothing in the record to show that he 1987.
had done anything at all to eventry to minimize the damage caused upon
plaintiff child. The Tamargos went to the CA petitioning for mandamus and certiorari to
reverse all three trial court orders. CA denied them because they lost the right
Elcano v. Hill| G.R. No. L-24803 May 26, 1977| Barredo, J. to appeal.
Separate yung civil liability sa RPC at negligence sa Civil Code so pwede
lang mag claim damages. Liable din parents of Hill kasi nakatira pa sa ISSUE:
Whether or not the adoption may be given retroactive effect, making the entrusted Larry's growth and development to the Aguirre Spouses, so that
adopting parents the indispensable parties even when actual custody was with when the time comes, he may be an empowered citizen of the country,
the natural parents. (In this case, NO. Creates injustice e) capable of making his own choices and fully undertaking his own
responsibilities.
RULING:
Granated, family affairs cannot always be subject to the State's inquiry,
Art. 2180 CC imposes civil liability on the father (or mother if the former is especially if no one comes forward to shed light on ongoing abuses, or worse
dead / incapacitated) for damages caused by a minor living with them. This still, if the abused merely sees the acts as matters of fact. Indeed, in child
stems from the doctrine of “imputed negligence,” where a person is not only abuse cases, the parents or guardians may be the abusers themselves. Those
liable for torts committed by him, but also for torts committed by others with entrusted with the care and protection of the child could very well be
whom he has a certain relationship and for whom he is responsible. Parental complicit in the abuse, if not its perpetrators. In these situations, allowing
liability is a consequence of the duties and responsibilities accompanying another person to represent the abused becomes apparent and more urgent,
parental authority. which is why barangay chairs, social workers, and concerned responsible
citizens are enjoined to file a complaint.90 When the abuse happens, no one
At the time of the shooting, parental authority resided with the Bundocs; since else will protect them from such harm.
they had actual custody at that time, they are indispensable parties to the case.
Thus, the argument that the transfer of parental authority has severed all ties
The Court disagrees with the Bundocs’ reliance on Art. 36 & 39 of the Child between Larry and Heart of Mary Villa does not hold water. To tolerate this
and Youth Welfare Code, since Art. 585 of the same code and Art. 221 FC6 line of reasoning would be to allow the persistence of abuses against children.
points to the parents holding actual custody liable for the minor’s tortuous Under no circumstances must child abuse be allowed to hide behind a shroud
acts. of secrecy, even more so if it is committed under the guise of parental
authority.
Retroactivity may be given in the granting of the petition when it is essential
for some benefit/advantage in favor of the child. However, the Court ruled Reference lang: Sec 27 of RA 7610: Who may file a complaint - on cases of
that it is unfair for parental authority to retroact to the Rapisuras to unduly unlawful acts committed against children as enumerated herein may be filed
burden them with liability for a tortuous act that they neither could’ve by the following:
foreseen nor prevented.
(a) Offended party;
Lastly, while Art. 357 of the Child and Youth Welfare Code vests parental (b) Parents or guardians;
authority in the adopting parents during the period of trial custody, i.e., before (c) Ascendant or collateral relative within the third degree of consanguinity;
the issuance of a decree of adoption, precisely because the adopting parents (d) Officer, social worker or representative of a licensed child-caring
are given actual custody of the child during such trial period. institution;
(e) Officer or social worker of the Department of Social Welfare and
In the instant case, the trial custody period either had not yet begun or bad Development;
already been completed at the time of the air rifle shooting. SEPARATE OPINIONS:

Sister Versoza v. People| GR 184535| 09/03/2019| Per Curiam PERALTA - For the guidance of the Bench and the Bar, the novel issue of
Under the law, once an adoption has been decreed, the legal ties between whether the bilateral vasectomy conducted on Larry constitutes child abuse
the biological parents and the child severed (sic). By analogy, since the under R.A. No. 7610 should be resolved. Agree that Bilateral Vasectomy did
subject child, Larry Aguirre was under an authorized adoption agency, the not constitute child abuse. State may intervene sa best interest din.
relationship between the said institution and the said child was severed and
parental authority is now vested with the adopting parents. This is now (sic) LEONEN – Bilateral Vasectomy constituted Child Abuse
safe to assume that Sister Pilar is divested of personality to file a complaint
against the accused for violation of Sections 3 and 10 of RA 7610. If at all, JARDELEZA – Whether an intellectually-disabled person has fundamental
it is only the State who has the right to prosecute for violation of the said right to procreate, may be tested in constitutional challenge. Concur with
law. (General point lang ‘to, possible pa rin na may cause of action) majority that petition be dismissed.

Nipa Vasectomy si Larry nung 24y/o siya nung mga nag ampon sa kanya CAGUIOA - Taking the circumstances in their totality, it is crystal clear to
(Sps Pedro and Lourdes), pero my mild deficiency siya at parang 8y/o lang me that Pedro and Michelina were driven by no other motive than that of love
mag isip. Nag file ng complaint si Sister kaso namatay siya, then hindi pa and compassion for Larry. Concur with the resolution.
nag appeal ang OSG. Nonetheless, may legal standing si Sister. (May
REYES - Such decisions should be presumed to have been made in Larry's
separate Opinion)
best interest, unless proven otherwise.
FACTS:
XXX v. People| G.R. No. 252087, February 10, 2021| Carandang, J.
Larry who was later discovered to have a mild mental deficiency was adopted It appears that petitioner was not unwilling to provide support per se, but
by spouses Perdo and Lourdes from the Good Shepard Sisters where Sister could not do so because the amount he could offer was not sufficient for
Versoza was the nursery supervisor. AAA to realize the aspirations she had set for CCC

When subjected to medical examination and after assessment, Pedro made his FACTS:
written consent for Dr. Agatep to perform Vasectomy. Later, his daughter
Version of Prosecution (AAA) muna
Gloria filed a complaint for violation of Art. 172 (Falsification), Art 272
(Mutilation) and under Sections 3 and 10 of RA 7610 but was denied for lack AAA and XXX (petitioner) bore a child out of wedlock, CCC. They lived in
of probable cause and lack of merit after MR. Balanga in the house of BBB, AAA’s sister; a year after, they got married.
AAA had no source of income and was dependent on either XXX or BBB for
Sister Versoza then filed her petition on the same grounds. Her petition was
support.
denied saying she has no legal standing because the adoption already severed
the ties between Larry and the institution. She now invokes that under RA In 2004 (until 2010), XXX works as a mechanic in Makati and would only
7610, she has a legal standing to sue as she was the nursery chief of the child- come home to Balanga on Saturdays. XXX gave support to AAA and CCC
rearing institution. Unfortunately, she died and NO APPEAL was initiated by P1,000 to P2,000 monthly.
the OSG.
In 2005, XXX stopped coming home and providing support. AAA complained
ISSUE: for support from XXX before their barangay. It was agreed that XXX would
provide P4,000 for support, which the latter did not fulfill and gave only
Whether or not petitioner has legal standing. (NONE. Pero possible sana na
P1,000 once. AAA no longer saw XXX after that until she chanced him at a
meron kung buhay pa siya, so long as may probable cause na may child
Chowking restaurant.
abuse)
Version of the Defense (XXX)
RULING: Denied for lack of a party, on account of petitioner's death, and for
lack of an appeal from the Office of the Solicitor General. XXX decided to marry AAA when she got pregnant, but was reluctant to do
so because of her dominating personality. He then stopped living with AAA in
As a private complainant to the criminal action, petitioner's role is confined to
2005 because he was violent and was constantly harassing and pestering him.
being a mere witness, her interest in the case limited to only the civil liability.
Only the State, through the Office of the Solicitor General, can appeal the The several complaints AAA filed were intended to force him to live with her
criminal aspect of the case. Thus, absent any action on the part of the Office again, but he did not want to. Before the barangay, XXX offered to provide
of the Solicitor General, the appeal cannot prosper. P1,000 to P2,000 monthly and to pay for CCC’s education in a public school
because private education is too costly for him. BBB wanted CCC to go to
Therefore, the substantive issue of whether there was a violation of Republic
Bataan Montessori, a private school.
Act No. 7610 will not be tackled here. However, in light of the ramifications
and gravity of the issue involved, the ponente submits his own opinion XXX presented as witness Jesselyn Mortejo, a psychologist and
separate from the opinion of this Court En Banc. psychometrician, who found that the former showed symptoms of Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). They were attributed to negative
Relavant point:
experiences with his wife such as incidents of public humiliation, physical
The authority granted to the Aguirre Spouses to raise Larry as their ward is a violence, and threats that she will ruin his life and has a strong correlation
responsibility that went beyond the mere transfer of the child's physical with his cardiovascular disease.
custody. When they were granted guardianship, the Aguirre Spouses
committed themselves to protect and uphold Larry's best interests. The State
He argues that he did not deny support but he failed to provide for it. He Bautista was CARAVAN TRAVELS employee and the van was registered to
maintained that he had offered to give support based on his capacity to earn, the latter. Ermilinda then filed a complaint for damages against the two but
but was refused by AAA. Thus, he admitted that he may have failed to Bautista was dropped upon her motion. The RTC found that Bautista was
provide support but not in a manner contemplated as an element of a violation grossly negligent. Caravan was then ordered to pay damages for being jointly
of Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262. and solidary liable. This was affirmed by the CA.

RTC convicted XXX for violation of Section 5(i), RA 922, and found that all WON Caravan should be held liable as an employer pursuant to article 2180
elements were proven: of the civil code.

1.) the offended party is a woman and/or her child or children; Yes. Abejar who exercise substitute parental authority suffered actual loss
2.) the woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is woman making her real party in interest. 216 of the FC identifies the persons who
with whom the offender has or & had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a exercise substitute parental authority. There being no surviving grandparent,
woman with whom such offender has a common child. As for the woman's no brother or sister over 21 years old, ABEJAR is Reyes actual custodian over
child or children, they may be legitimate or illegitimate, or living within or 21 years old. 233 of the FC provides that authority of substitute parental
without the family abode; authority is the same as those of actual parents.
3.) the offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional
anguish; and Reyes was already 18 years old, already emancipated upon her death. Parental
4.) the anguish is caused through x x x denial of financial support x x x authority is already terminated BUT the anguish and damage were still the
same.
XXX contends that the 3rd and 4th element were not satisfied in this case.
However, CA affirmed the decision of RTC with modifications as to fines and 2180 of the CC provides that employers shall be liable for the damages caused
mandatory psychological treatment of XXX.
by their employees and household helpers acting within the scope of their
ISSUE: assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business or
industry. The employee must be acting with the scope of the assigned task or
Whether or not the CA committed reversible error in affirming the RTC's the operation of REGISTERED OWNER RULE. Once ownership is proven,
judgment findingthe petitioner guilty of violating Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262. disputable presumption arises and shifted the burden to the employer or
(YES) registered owner. Caravan failed to exercise the diligence in the selection and
supervision. Bautista was only holding NON PROF license. It also failed to
RULING: Petition GRANTED (Acquitted) prove that Bautista was acting in its private capacity and admitted him to be
its employee.
The third and fourth elements of a violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262 were
not proven beyond reasonable doubt. Bautista is not also an indispensable party. Liability imposed to the registered
owner is direct and primary. Affirmed.
Psychological violence is the means employed by the perpetrator, while
emotional anguish or mental suffering are the effects caused to or the damage People v. Bayobos
sustained by the offended party. In the case of Dinamling, the Court held that
the "focus of this particular criminal act [Section S(i) of R.A. 9262] is the PMMA were criminally charged before the Sandiganbayan as accomplices to
causation of non-physical suffering, that is, mental or emotional distress, or hazing under the Anti hazing law. Before arraignment, the SB quashed the
even anxiety and social shame or dishonor on the offended party." information because the principal accused case was dismissed and failure to
include the material averment required.
It appears that petitioner was not unwilling to provide support per se, but
could not do so because the amount he could offer was not sufficient for AAA Balidoy was admitted as a probationary midshipman at PMMA. All new
to realize the aspirations she had set for CCC, e.g., that the latter be schooled entrants are required to successfully complete the mandatory Indoctrination
privately. While We cannot fault AAA for setting such aspirations for her and Orientation Period which was set from May 2 to June 1 wherein he died
child, it remains that petitioner was not in a position to meet such. That on May 3. The NBI found probable cause to charge the principals, Alvares et
petitioner attempted to find a way to provide support within his means al before the RTC. The assistant provincial prosecutor endorsed to the deputy
indicates that he did not willfully set out to cause psychological violence upon Omb for the Military the finding of probable cause to charge the following
AAA, even when the latter was constantly harassing him, which later on schools as accomplices and a criminal case was thereafter filed before the SB.
caused his PTSD. The RTC dismissed the information against the principal accused. The SB
then quashed the information against the accomplices there being no principal
Consequently, We cannot conclude beyond reasonable doubt that he caused by direct participation.
AAA's emotional distress. The evidence shows that petitioner could not
provide support because: (1) AAA prevented him from doing so by refusing WON the crime against the accomplices proceeds despite the dismissal of the
what he could offer; and (2) he was suffering from an incurable mental illness principals case
which, though not sufficient to be considered a form of insanity, was to a
degree that effectively incapacitated him from earning. Yes. The law provides that the responsibilities of the principals, accomplices
and accessories are distinct from each other. They can proceed independently.
Renalyn Masbate v. Ricky James Relucio
However, the quashal was PROPER.
QUEENIE was born in 2012 to the spouses who has been living together in
Renalyn parents without the benefit of marriage. 3 years after, Renalyn went The constitution recognizes the right of the accused to be informed of the
to Manila. James alleged that Renalyn parents took Quennie from the school nature and cause of the accusation against the accused. There must be a
where he had enrolled her. They refused when he asked them to give her back sufficient information. The accused may move to quash the information under
and showed an SPA granting them full parental rights, authority and custody. RULE 117 if the facts charged do not constitute an offense.

He then filed a petition for habeas corpus and custody before the RTC. During Section 4 of the anti hazing law provides that school authorities including
the hearing, Renalyn brought Quennie. The court held 3 year old daughter faculty members who consent to the hazing or who have actual knowledge but
rightfully belongs to Renalyn, 176 of the Family Code and dismissed the failed to take any action to prevent the same shall be punished as accomplices.
HABEAS CORPUS PETITION. The CA found it unsupported. But it The elements of hazing are; a person is placed under some embarrassing or
affirmed the custody pending the outcome of the case. The CA remanded the humiliating situation or subjected to physical or psychological suffering or
case to the RTC. injury; these are prerequisite for an entry or admission to an organization. The
school authorities and faculty members is liable when the elements are
WON the CA correctly remanded the case for determination of who should established, the accused school authorities of faculty members and they
exercise custody over Quennie consented or failed to take preventive action.

Yes. Habeas corpus is prosecuted for the purpose of determining the right of PMMA is an organization attached with the Department of Transportation and
custody over the child. Father and mother shall jointly exercise parental Communications, government owned educational institution. Being a testing
authority over the persons of their common children but the FC provides that and training ground is not an essential element.
illegitimate children shall be under the parental authority of their mother. The
court will not deprive it absent any imperative cause. No child under 7 years Here, there was no allegation that the purported acts were employed as
old shall be separated from the mother unless there is compelling reason. If prerequisite for admission or entry. The information does not constitute an
there is, James cannot still acquire custody because no law granting custody to offense. Dismissed.
an illegitimate father. If Renalyn is unfit, substitute parental authority shall be
Saint Joseph College v Jayson Miranda
exercised by the grandparent, 214 and 216 of the FC.
Inside the school, the class was conducting a science experiment under Mam
However, the court is NOT bound by any legal right of a person over a child.
Tabugo. Tabugo left the class while doing the students were doing the
Its welfare is the supreme consideration as provided in the child and youth
experiment. Jayson who was the assistant leader checked the experiment when
Welfare Code. Affirmed.
a compound spurted out which resulted that his eyes were chemically burned.
Caravan Travel and Tours v. Ermilinda Abejar Jesmariane His mother in abroad rushed back home. They suffered mental anguish.
Jayson then filed a complaint for damages.
Reyes was walking along the west bound lane. Opposite to her was a L300
van which swerved to its left and hit her. Espinosa, witness, loaded her to the The school argued that Jayson already in his sufficient age and discretion.
van and told the driver, BAUTISTA to bring her to the hospital but the latter That he was pronounced ready for discharge and the test showed that his
appeared to have left. An unidentified man drove BUT Reyes died 2 days vision has not been impaired.
after.
Jayson parents wrote a letter to the school demanding the medical expenses
but no to avail. The RTC ruled in Jayson favor. The CA affirmed it in toto.
WON the school should be held liable stand, in loco parentis to a certain extent to their pupils and students and are
called upon to “exercise reasonable supervision over the conduct of the child.”
Yes. Petitioners all failed to exercise the reasonable care, prudence, caution In this case,
and foresight to prevent or avoid injuries to the students. The proximate cause
was the sudden and unexpected explosion of the chemicals, independent of The unfortunate death resulting from the fight between the
any intervening event. Tabugo was in charged with the teaching and vigilance protagonists-students could have been avoided, had said defendants complied
over their students as well as the supervision and ensuring of their well being. with their duty of providing adequate supervision over the activities of the
She was not inside the room when the accident happen because it is unnatural students in the school premises to protect their students from harm. Since
that she was not the one who brought Jayson to the clinic. Valenton and Quibule failed to prove that they observed all the diligence of a
good father of a family to prevent damage, they cannot likewise avail of the
Sr. Ambatali is likewise culpable under the doctrine of command exemption to the liability. The judgment of the appellate court was modified,
responsibility because Tabugo was under her direct control and supervision. while claim for compensatory damages was increased in accordance with
St. Joseph College is guilty of inexcusable laxity in supervision of its teachers. recent jurisprudence and the claim for exemplary damages denied in the
It has the full information on the nature of dangerous science experiments. It absence of gross negligence on the part of the said defendants.
is liable under the principle of respondent superior.
Amadora vs. CA/ G.R. No. L-47745/ April 15, 1988/ Cruz, J.
The proximate cause was the concurrent failure to prevent the foreseeable
mishap. 218 of the FC in relation to 2180 of the CC. DENIED. Alfredo Amadora, seventeen years old was about to graduate,
however while in the school, Colegion de San Jose-Recoletos, a classmate,
St. Francis High School vs. CA/ G. R. No. 82465/February 25, 1991/Paras, Pablito Damon, fired a gun that mortally hit Alfredo, ending all his
J. expectations and his life as well. Damon was convicted of homicide thru
reckless imprudence. Herein petitioners, as the victim's parents, filed a civil
Ferdinand Castillo, a freshman at St. Francis High School, wanted to action for damages under Article 2180 of the Civil Code against the Colegio
participate in a school picnic. Because of the short notice, his parents, de San Jose-Recoletos, its rector the high school principal, the dean of boys,
respondents' spouses Dr. Romulo Castillo and Lilia Cadiz Castillo, did not and the physics teacher, together with Damon and two other students, through
allow their son to attend, instead allowing him to bring food to the teachers for their respective parents. The complaint against the students was later dropped
the picnic, with the instruction that he return home afterward. However, due to
the teachers' persuasion, Ferdinand agreed to accompany them to the beach. The trial court held the remaining defendants liable to the
One of the female teachers was apparently drowning during the picnic. Some plaintiffs. On appeal to the respondent court, however, the decision was
of the students, including Ferdinand, rushed to her aid, but Ferdinand drowned reversed and all the defendants were completely absolved. The petitioners
in the process. He passed away. Respondent spouses brought a civil suit contend that their son was in the school to show his physics experiment as a
against the petitioner and some of their teachers. The trial court found teachers prerequisite to his graduation; hence, he was then under the custody of the
liable but dismissed complaint against the school. private respondents. The private respondents submit that Alfredo had gone to
the school only for the purpose of submitting his physics report and that he
Whether or not Petitioner and teachers are liable. was no longer in their custody because the semester had already ended.
Yes. Under the law, before an employer may be held liable for the negligence Whether or not Article 2180 covers even establishments which are
of his employee, the act or omission which caused damage must have technically not school of arts and trades, and, if so, when the offending student
occurred while an employee was in the performance of his assigned tasks. In is supposed to be in its custody.
the case at bar, the teachers/petitioners were not in the actual performance of
their assigned tasks. What was held was a purely private affair, a picnic, The provision in question should apply to all schools, academic as
which did not have permit from the school since it was not a school well as non-academic. Where the school is academic rather than technical or
sanctioned activity. Mere knowledge by petitioner/principal of the planning of vocational in nature, responsibility for the tort committed by the student will
the picnic does not in any way consent to the holding of the same. No attach to the teacher in charge of such student, following the first part of the
negligence could be attributable to the petitioners-teachers to warrant the provision. This is the general rule. In the case of establishments of arts and
award of damages to the respondents-spouses. The class adviser of the section trades, it is the head thereof, and only he, who shall be held liable as an
where Ferdinand belonged, did her best and exercised diligence of a good exception to the general rule. In other words, teachers in general shall be
father of a family to prevent any untoward incident or damages to all the liable for the acts of their students except where the school is technical in
students who joined the picnic. nature, in which case it is the head thereof who shall be answerable.
Following the canon of reddendo singula singulis "teachers" should apply to
Palisoc vs. Brillantes/G.R. No. L-29025 October 4, 1971/Teehankee, J. the words "pupils and students" and "heads of establishments of arts and
trades" to the word "apprentices."
The Deceased Dominador Palisoc and defendant Virgilio Daffon
were automotive mechanics students at the Manila Technical Institute (MTI). In sum, the Court finds under the facts as disclosed by the record
In the afternoon of March 10, 1966 during recess, an altercation transpired and in the light of the principles herein announced that none of the
between the deceased and the defendant. At the time of the incident, respondents is liable for the injury inflicted by Pablito Damon on Alfredo
Dominador was sixteen years old while Virgilio was already of age. Virgilio Amadora that resulted in the latter's death at the auditorium of the Colegio de
was working on a machine with Dominador looking at them. The situation San Jose-Recoletos. While the court deeply sympathize with the petitioners
prompted Virgilio to remark that Dominador was acting like a foreman. As a over the loss of their son under the tragic circumstances here related, the court
result, Dominador slapped Virgilio on the face. Virgilio retaliated by inflicting nevertheless are unable to extend them the material relief they seek, as a balm
severe blows upon Dominador’s stomach, which caused the latter to stumble to their grief, under the law they have invoked. Wherefore, the petition is
upon an engine block and faint. The latter died, the cause of death being denied.
“shock due to traumatic fracture of the ribs”. The parents of Dominador filed
an action for damages against (1) Virgilio, (2) Valenton, the head/president of Salvosa vs. IAC/ G.R. No. 70458/ October 5, 1988/Padilla, J.
MTI, (3) Quibule who was the teacher in charge at the time of the incident,
and (4) Brillantes who is a member of the board of directors and former sole Baguio Colleges Foundation is an academic institution. However, it is also an
proprietor of MTI. institution of arts and trade because BCF has a full-fledged technical-
vocational department offering Communication, Broadcast and Teletype
The trial court held Virgilio liable but absolved the other Technician courses as well as Electronics Serviceman and Automotive
defendants-officials. It stated that the clause “so long as they remain in their Mechanics courses.
custody” contained in Article 2180 of the Civil Code applies only where the
pupil lives and boards with the teachers, such that the control or influence on Within the premises of the BCF is an ROTC Unit. The Baguio Colleges
the pupil supersedes those of the parents., and such control and responsibility Foundation ROTC Unit had Jimmy B. Abon as its duly appointed
for the pupil’s actions would pass from the father and mother to the teachers. armorer.  As armorer of the ROTC Unit, Jimmy B. Abon received his
This legal conclusion was based on the dictum in Mercado v. CA, which in appointment from the AFP. Not being an employee of the BCF, he also
turn based its decision in Exconde v. Capuno. The trial court held that Article received his salary from the AFP,  as well as orders from Captain Roberto C.
2180 was not applicable in this case, as defendant Virgilio did not live with Ungos. Jimmy B. Abon was also a commerce student of the BCF.
the defendants-officials at the time of the incident. Hence, this petition.
On 3 March 1977, at around 8:00 p.m., in the parking space of BCF, Jimmy
WON the petitioners will be held liable for damages for the death of B. Abon shot Napoleon Castro a student of the University of Baguio with an
Dominador together with the defendant. unlicensed firearm which the former took from the armory of the ROTC Unit
of the BCF.  As a result, Napoleon Castro died and Jimmy B. Abon was
Yes.The head/president and teacher of MTI (Valenton and Quibule prosecuted for, and convicted of the crime of Homicide.
respectively) were held liable jointly and severally with the Virgilio for
damages. No liability attaches to Brillantes as a mere member of the MTI Subsequently, the heirs of Napoleon Castro sued for damages, impleading
board of directors. Similarly, MTI may not be held liable since it had not been Jimmy B. Abon and the BCF .
properly impleaded as party defendant. The phrase used in Article 2180, “so
long as the students remain in their custody” means the protective and WON BCF is subsidiarily liable.
supervisory custody that the school and its heads and teachers exercise over
the pupils and students for as long as they are at attendance in the school, Yes. Under the penultimate paragraph of Art. 2180 of the Civil
including recess time. There is nothing in the law that requires that for such Code, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades are liable for
liability to attach the pupil or student who commits the tortuous act must live “damages caused by their pupils and students or apprentices, so long as they
and board in the school. The dicta in the cases of Mercado as well as in remain in their custody.” The rationale of such liability is that so long as the
Exconde v. Capuno on which it relied are deemed to have been set aside. The student remains in the custody of a teacher, the latter “stands, to a certain
rationale of such liability of school heads and teachers for the tortious acts of extent, in loco parentis as to the student and is called upon to exercise
their pupils and students, so long as they remain in their custody, is that they reasonable supervision over the conduct of the student.” Likewise, “the phrase
used in [Art. 2180 — ‘so long as (the students) remain in their custody means
the protective and supervisory custody that the school and its heads and obligations arising from quasi-delicts or tort, also known as extra-contractual
teachers exercise over the pupils and students for as long as they are at obligations, arise only between parties not otherwise bound by contract,
attendance in the school, including recess time.” Jimmy B. Abon cannot be whether express or implied.
considered to have been “at attendance in the school,” or in the custody of
BCF, when he shot Napoleon Castro. Logically, therefore, petitioners cannot When an academic institution accepts students for enrollment, there is
under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code be held solidarity liable with Jimmy B. established a contract between them, resulting in bilateral obligations which
Abon for damages resulting from his acts. both parties are bound to comply with. For its part, the school undertakes to
provide the student with an education that would presumably suffice to equip
Ylarde vs. Aquino/G.R. No. L-33722/July 29, 1988/Gancayco, J. him with the necessary tools and skills to pursue higher education or a
profession. On the other hand, the student covenants to abide by the school’s
Mariano Soriano was the principal of the Gabaldon Primary academic requirements and observe its rules and regulations. Necessarily, the
School in Pangasinan while Edgardo Aquino was a teacher therein. The school must ensure that adequate steps are taken to maintain peace and order
school had several concrete blocks which were remnants of the old school within the campus premises and to prevent the breakdown thereof.
shop destroyed in World War II. Aquino decided to help clear the area. So
after the classes, he gathered 18 of his male pupils, aged 10-11, and ordered In the circumstances obtaining in the case at bar, however, there is, as yet, no
them to dig beside a one-ton concrete block in making a hole where the stone finding that the contract between the school and Bautista had been breached
can be buried. The following day he called 4 of the 18 students, including thru the former’s negligence in providing proper security measures. This
Novelito Ylarde to complete the excavation. When the depth was right enough would be for the trial court to determine. And, even if there be a finding of
to accommodate the concrete block, Aquino and his four pupils got out of the negligence, the same could give rise generally to a breach of contractual
hole. Aquino left the children to level the loose soil while he went to see obligation only.
another teacher for the key to the school workroom where he can get some
rope. Before leaving, he told the children “Not to touch the stone”.  After he Soliman vs. Tuazon/G.R. No. 66207 /May 18, 1992/ Feliciano, J.
left, 3 of the children playfully jumped into the pit. Then, without any warning
at all, the remaining one jumped on top of the concrete block causing it to Petitioner Soliman, Jr. filed a civil complaint for damages against
slide down towards the opening. Unfortunately, Novelito Ylarde was pinned private respondent Republic Central Colleges ("Colleges"), the R.L. Security
to the wall which led to his death 3 days after.  The parents of Ylarde filed a Agency Inc. and one Jimmy Solomon, a security guard, as defendants. The
suit for damages against both Aquino and Soriano. complaint alleged that:

While the plaintiff was in the campus ground and premises of the
defendant, REPUBLIC CENTRAL COLLEGES, as he was and is still a
WON Aquino and Soriano be held liable for damages. regular enrolled student of said school... taking his morning classes, the
Yes. Under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, it is only the teacher and not defendant, JIMMY B. SOLOMON, who was on said date and hour in the
the head of an academic school who should be answerable for torts committed premises of said school performing his duties and obligations as a duly
by their students while in a school of arts and trades, it is only the head of the appointed security guard under the employment, supervision and control of
school who can be held liable. It was held in Amadora vs. Court of his... employer-defendant R.L. SECURITY AGENCY, INC., headed by Mr.
Appeals that: Benjamin Serrano, without any provocation, in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless,
oppressive or malevolent manner, with intent to kill, attack, assault, strike and
Where the school is academic rather than technical or vocational in shoot the plaintiff on the abdomen with a Caliber Revolver, a deadly weapon,
nature, responsibility for the tort committed by the student will attach to the which ordinarily such wound sustained would have caused plaintiff's death
teacher in charge of such student, following the first part of the provision. were it not for the timely medical assistance given to him. The plaintiff was
This is the general rule. In the case of establishments of arts and trades, it is treated and confined at Angeles Medical Center, Angeles City, and, as per
the head thereof, and only he, who shall be held liable as an exception to the doctor's opinion, the plaintiff may not be able to attend to his regular classes
general rule. In other words, teachers in general shall be liable for the acts of and will be incapacitated in the performance of his usual work for a duration
their students except where the school is technical in nature, in which case it is of from three to four months before his wounds would be completely healed."
the head thereof who shall be answerable. Following the canon of reddendo
singula sinquilis 'teachers' should apply to the words "pupils and students' and Private respondent Colleges filed a motion to dismiss, contending
'heads of establishments of arts and trades to the word "apprentices. Hence, that the complaint stated no cause of action against it. Private respondent
applying the said doctrine to this case, we rule that private respondent argued that it is free from any liability for the injuries sustained by petitioner
Soriano, as principal, cannot be held liable for the reason that the school he student for the reason that private respondent school was not the employer of
heads is an academic school and not a school of arts and trades. Besides, as the security guard charged, Jimmy Solomon, and hence was not responsible
clearly admitted by private respondent Aquino, private respondent Soriano did for any wrongful act of Solomon. Private respondent school further argued
not give any instruction regarding the digging. that Article 2180, 7th paragraph, of the Civil Code did not apply, since said
paragraph holds teachers and heads of establishment of arts and trades liable
From the foregoing, it can be easily seen that private respondent Aquino can for damages caused by their pupils and students or apprentices, while security
be held liable under Article 2180 of the Civil Code as the teacher-in-charge of guard Jimmy Solomon was not a pupil, student or apprentice of the school.
the children for being negligent in his supervision over them and his failure to
take the necessary precautions to prevent any injury on their persons.  In an order dated 29 November 1983, respondent Judge granted private
respondent school's motion to dismiss, holding that security guard Jimmy
it is very clear that private respondent Aquino acted with fault and Solomon was not an employee of the school which accordingly could not be
gross negligence when he: (1) failed to avail himself of services of adult held liable for his acts or omissions. Petitioner moved for reconsideration,
manual laborers and instead utilized his pupils aged ten to eleven to make an without success.
excavation near the one-ton concrete stone which he knew to be a very
hazardous task; (2) required the children to remain inside the pit even after WON the trial judge committed a grave abuse of discretion when
they had finished digging, knowing that the huge block was lying nearby and he refused to apply the provisions of Article 2180, as well as those of Articles
could be easily pushed or kicked aside by any pupil who by chance may go to 349, 350 and 352, of the Civil Code and granted the school's motion to
the perilous area; (3) ordered them to level the soil around the excavation dismiss.
when it was so apparent that the huge stone was at the brink of falling; (4)
No.
went to a place where he would not be able to check on the children's safety;
and (5) left the children close to the excavation, an obviously attractive The first paragraph quoted above offers no basis for holding the
nuisance. Colleges liable for the alleged wrongful acts of security guard Jimmy B.
Solomon inflicted upon petitioner Soliman, Jr. Private respondent school was
The negligent act of private respondent Aquino in leaving his pupils in such a
not the employer of Jimmy Solomon. The employer of Jimmy Solomon was
dangerous site has a direct causal connection to the death of the child Ylarde.
the R.L. Security Agency Inc., while the school was the client or customer of
Left by themselves, it was but natural for the children to play
the R.L. Security Agency Inc. It is settled that where the security agency, as
around. Everything that occurred was the natural and probable effect of the
here, recruits, hires and assigns the work of its watchmen or security guards,
negligent acts of private respondent Aquino. Needless to say, the child Ylarde
the agency is the employer of such guards or watchmen.[2] Liability for
would not have died were it not for the unsafe situation created by private
illegal or harmful acts committed by the security guards attaches to the
respondent Aquino which exposed the lives of all the pupils concerned to real
employer agency, and not to the clients or customers of such agency. As a
danger. 
general rule, a client or customer of a security agency has no hand in selecting
PSBA vs. CA/G.R. No. 84698/ February 4, 1992/Padilla, J. who among the pool of security guards or watchmen employed by the agency
shall be assigned to it, the duty to observe the diligence of a good father of a
Private respondents sought to adjudge petitioner PSBA and its family in the selection of the guards cannot, in the ordinary course of events,
officers liable for the death of Carlitos Bautista, a third-year commerce be demanded from the client whose premises or property are protected by the
student who was stabbed while on the premises of PSBA by elements from security guards. The fact that a client company may give instructions or
outside the school. Private respondents are suing under the law on quasi- directions to the security guards assigned to it, does not by itself, render the
delicts alleging the school and its officers’ negligence, recklessness and lack client responsible as an employer of the security guards concerned and liable
of safety precautions before, during, and after the attack on the victim. for their wrongful acts or omissions. Those instructions or directions are
Petitioners moved to dismiss the suit but were denied by the trial court. CA ordinarily no more than requests commonly envisaged in the contract for
affirmed. services entered into with the security agency. There being no employer-
employee relationship between the Colleges and Jimmy Solomon, petitioner
Whether or not PSBA may be held liable under quasi-delicts. student cannot impose vicarious liability upon the Colleges for the acts of
security guard Solomon.
No. Because the circumstances of the present case evince a
contractual relation between the PSBA and Carlitos Bautista, the rules on Since there is no question that Jimmy Solomon was not a pupil or
quasi-delict do not really govern. A perusal of Article 2176 shows that student or an apprentice of the Colleges, he being in fact an employee of the
R.L. Security Agency Inc., the other above-quoted paragraph of Article 2180 registered owner of the vehicle who should be held responsible for damages
of the Civil Code is similarly not available for imposing... liability upon the for the death of Sherwin. Registered owner of any vehicle, even if not used for
Republic Central Colleges for the acts or omissions of Jimmy Solomon. public service, would primarily be responsible to the public or to third persons
for injuries caused the latter while the vehicle was being driven on the
The relevant portions of the other Articles of the Civil Code invoked by highways or streets.
petitioner are as follows:

"Art. 349. The following persons shall exercise substitute parental authority

Art. 350. The persons named in the preceding article shall exercise reasonable
supervision over the conduct of the child.

Art. 352. The relations between teacher and pupil, professor and student are
fixed by government regulations and those of each school or institution. In no
case shall corporal punishment be countenanced. The teacher or professor
shall cultivate the best potentialities of the heart and mind of the pupil or
student."

In line, therefore, with the most recent jurisprudence of this Court,

and in order to avoid a possible substantial miscarriage of justice, and putting
aside technical considerations, we consider that respondent trial judge
committed serious error correctible by this Court in the instant case.

St. Mary’s Academy vs. Carpitanos/ G.R. No. 143363/ February 6, 2002/
Pardo, J.

For the school year 1995-1996, St. Mary's Academy of Dipolog

City conducted an enrollment drive through visitation of other schools where
prospective high school enrollees were studying. Among the students of the
school who took part in the campaign was Sherwin Carpitanos and James
Daniel. Sherwin and other high school students were riding in a Mitsubishi
jeep owned by Vivencio Villanueva and driven by James, then 15 years old.
On their way to Dapitan City, the jeep turned turtle resulting in the death of
Sherwin. 

The parents of Sherwin thus sued James and his parents, Villanueva and
SMA. At the trial, the traffic investigator testified and submitted his report
showing that the jeep turned turtle because the steering wheel guide of the
jeep was detached. This report and the testimony of the traffic investigator
was not disputed by any of the parties. 

After trial, the lower court held that the school is primary liable for damages
as it had special parental authority at the time of the accident. The parents of
James were found to be only subsidiarily liable and were ordered to pay only
in the event of insolvency of the school. James was absolved for being only a
minor under the special parental authority of the school. Villanueva, the
vehicle owner was not held liable at all.

Whether or not the lower court correct in ruling that the school is primary
liable for damages as it had special parental authority at the time of the
accident.

No. 

Under Article 218 of the Family Code, the following shall have
special parental authority over a minor child while under their supervision,
instruction or custody: (1) the school, its administrators and teachers; or (2)
the individual, entity or institution engaged in child care. 

This special parental authority and responsibility applies to all authorized

activities, whether inside or outside the premises of the school, entity or
institution. Thus, such authority and responsibility apply to field trips,
excursions and other affairs of the pupils and students outside the school
premises whenever authorized by the school or its teachers.

Under Article 219 of the Family Code, if the person under custody is a minor,
those exercising special parental authority are principally and solidarily liable
for damages caused by the acts or omissions of the unemancipated minor
while under their supervision, instruction, or custody. However, for the school
to be liable, there must be a finding that the act or omission considered as
negligent was the proximate cause of the death or injury sustained. Injury for
which recovery is sought must be the legitimate consequence of the wrong
done. Negligence, no matter in what it consists, cannot create a right of action
unless it is the proximate cause of the injury complained of. And the
proximate cause of an injury is that cause which, in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury,
and without which the result would not have occurred. 

In this case, the parents of Sherwin failed to show that the proximate cause of
the accident was the negligence of the school authorities. They admitted that
the immediate cause of the accident was not the negligence of SMA or the
reckless driving of James, but the detachment of the steering wheel guide of
the jeep. Hence reliance on Art. 219, of the Family Code is unfounded. 
Further, it was Ched the grandson of the vehicle owner Vivencio who allowed
the minor James to drive the jeep at the time of the accident. The school did
not allow James to drive the jeep. So, whether the accident was caused by the
reckless driving of James or the mechanical detachment of the steering wheel
guide of the jeep, the school could not be held liable since these are events
which it had no control. If the school may be considered negligent, it was only
the remote cause of the accident. Between the remote cause and the injury,
there intervened the negligence of the minor’s parents or the detachment of
the steering wheel guide of the jeep.

At any rate, since it is clear that the accident occurred because of the
detachment of the steering wheel guide of the jeep, it is not the school but the