FE PEREZ vs.
JOSEFINA GUTIERREZ who, in fact, even assumed responsibility for the
and PANFILO ALAJAR hospitalization of Perez. The court held Alajar liable to
pay Perez hospital expenses, actual and moral
damages, incidental expenses and attorney’s fees as
well as payment to Gutierrez of moral damages and
FACTS: attorney’s fees, with cost of suit in both cases.
Appellant Fe Perez, together with 9 co-teachers, was The present appeal questions the correctness of the
a passenger of an AC jeepney registered under the dispositive portion of the decision a quo which
name of Appellee Josefina which met an accident due adjudged Alajar, instead of Gutierrez, as the party
to the reckless negligence of its driver liable to her for the payment of the damages
adjudicated in her favor. Perez argues that the
Leopoldo Cordero resulting in injuries to herself which registered owner of a motor vehicle should be the one
required her hospitalization. held liable for damages resulting from breach of
contract of carriage by a common carrier.
Perez filed a case against Gutierrez for damages in
the Court of First Instance of Davao. The complaint ISSUE: Whether or not the trial court erred in holding
was later amended for breach of contract of carriage Alajar liable to answer for damages resulting from
against Gutierrez. breach of contract of carriage
Gutierrez averred that actual owner of the jeepney, RULING: Yes, Gutierrez is the one liable to Perez
Panfilo Alajar, should be held responsible for the for damages, not Alajar.
accident against whom she filed a third-party
complaint. Her assertion was pursuant to the Deed of
Sale executed bet Gutierrez and Alajar which
provided that the latter binds himself and assumes RATIO:
responsibility for all actions, claims, demands, and
rights of action, and whatever kind and nature, that
may hereafter develop as a consequence of or in the
course of operation of the vehicle. In Peralta vs. Mangusang:
Alajar disclaimed responsibility alleging that the deed If the property covered by the franchise is transferred or
of sale was null and void for it has not been registered leased to another without obtaining the requisite approval, the
with the Public Service Commission despite his transfer is not binding on the Public Service Commission and,
in contemplation of law, the grantee continues to be
demands on vendee Gutierrez; the Gutierrez collects responsible under the franchise in relation to the Commission
rentals from him for the use of said vehicle; and that and to the public for the consequences incident to the
title to said vehicle remained with Gutierrez pending operation of the vehicle.
approval of the sale by the Public Service
Commission.
In Erezo vs. Jepte:
CFI Davao Ruling: the trial court found Leopoldo
Cordero (driver) guilty of reckless imprudence and
found that Alajar owned and operated the vehicle
... that in dealing with vehicles registered under the Public The trial court erred in holding Panfilo Alajar, rather
Service Law, the public has the right to assume or presume than Josefina Gutierrez, as the one directly liable to
that the registered owner is the actual owner thereof, for it
Fe Perez for the latter's injuries and the
would be difficult for the public to enforce the actions that they
may have for injuries caused to them by the vehicles being corresponding damages incurred. Further, the lower
negligently operated if the public should be required to prove court inexplicably failed to hold the driver (Leopoldo
who the actual owner is. Cordero), whom it found guilty of reckless
imprudence, jointly and solidarily liable with Josefina
Gutierrez to Fe Perez in accordance with the
provisions of article 2184 in relation to article 2180 of
In Tamayo vs. Aquino: the new Civil Code.
But as the transferee, who operated the vehicle when the The judgment is modified in the sense that Josefina
passenger died, is the one directly responsible for the accident Gutierrez and Leopoldo Cordero are hereby adjudged
and death, he should in turn be made responsible to the directly and jointly and solidarily liable to Fe Perez for
registered owner for what the latter may have been adjudged
the sums adjudicated in the judgment below in her
to pay. In operating the truck without transfer thereof having
been approved by the Public Service Commission, the (Fe Perez') favor, while Panfilo Alajar is, in turn,
transferee acted merely as agent of the registered owner and hereby held answerable to Josefina Gutierrez for such
should be responsible to him (the registered owner), for any amount as the latter may pay to Fe Perez in
damages that he may cause the latter by his negligence. satisfaction of the judgment appealed from.
