Case Digest: Abiad vs. Albayda, Jr. G.R. No. 172200, July 6, 2010
Nachura, J.:
Petitioners:
The Heirs of Redentor Completo and Elpidio Abiad
Redentor Completo, taxi driver of a Toyota Corolla (Plate No. PYD-128)
Elpidio Abiad, owner of the taxi cab
Respondent:
Sgt. Amando C. Albayda, Jr.
Master Sergeant in the Philippine Air Force (PAF), based at Villamor Air Base (VAB), Pasay City.
Facts:
Sgt. Amando C. Albayda, Jr. and Redentor Completo were involved in an accident at the intersection of 8th and 11th Streets, Villamor Air Base (VAB).
On August 27, 1997, while Albayda was riding his bicycle to work, Completo’s taxi sideswiped and bumped him, causing severe injuries, including a fractured left knee.
Albayda was initially treated at the Philippine Air Force General Hospital (PAFGH), but was transferred to the Armed Forces of the Philippines Medical Center due to the severity of his injuries.
He was hospitalized from August 27, 1997, to February 11, 1998, and again from February 23 to March 22, 1998.
Attempts at conciliation between the parties failed.
Albayda filed a criminal complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in physical injuries against Completo.
Albayda reserved the right to file a separate civil case for damages against Completo and Abiad.
Completo filed a counter-complaint for damage to property, which was dismissed.
Albayda Allegations:
Completo, an employee of Abiad, was negligent during the accident, which caused Albayda's injuries.
The pain he suffered required him to undergo medical physiotherapy for a number of years to regain normality of his left knee joint. (Actual Damages: ₱276,550.00, spent on food, bed pan, caretaker, and inclusive of his anticipated operations)
Albayda experienced emotional distress, including mental anguish, frights, anxiety, and social humiliation. His wife abandoned him after the accident, further exacerbating his emotional suffering and left their children in his custody. (Moral Damages: ₱600,000.00)
Moral Damages: ₱200,000.00
Attorney's fees: ₱25,000.00
Court appearance fees: ₱1,000.00 per appearance
Albayda Witnesses’ Testimonies:
Michael Navarro:
Witnessed the accident on August 27, 1997, around 1:45 p.m.
Saw Completo’s taxicab moving at an unusually high speed.
The bicycle ridden by Albayda reached the intersection of 8th and 11th Streets before the taxicab hit it.
Testified that the taxicab was about 10 meters away when Albayda fell.
Dr. Ranny Santiago (Orthopedic Surgeon):
Treated Albayda at AFPMC.
Described Albayda’s injury as caused by a "hard impact."
Albayda’s leg fracture required traction and an eventual operation, but medical issues delayed the procedure.
Dr. Manuel Fidel Magtira:
Albayda was readmitted to AFPMC in January 1999 due to knee pain and limited motion.
Diagnosed with traumatic arthritis due to malunion of the knee.
Performed surgeries to restore mobility and relieve pain, but Albayda still experienced discomfort.
Amando C. Albayda, Jr.:
On August 27, 1997, while riding his bicycle to work, the fast-moving taxicab driven by Completo bumped his bike, causing him to fall and suffer a left knee fracture.
Described the extreme pain during treatment and the continued suffering after surgeries.
Claimed ₱600,000.00 in moral damages for the lifelong deformity and lack of help from Completo.
Dr. Rito Barrosa, Jr.:
Was present at the accident scene and helped carry Albayda into the taxicab for transport to the hospital.
Confirmed that Completo did not assist in carrying Albayda.
Completo Defense:
Completo claimed that he was driving carefully at a speed of 20 kilometers per hour when he heard a strange sound from the rear right side of his taxi.
Upon stopping to investigate, he found Albayda on the road, holding his leg. Completo immediately took Albayda to the hospital for treatment.
Completo argued that Albayda was riding his bicycle at a high speed and lost control, causing the bicycle to hit the rear right door of the taxi, which resulted in a deep indentation. The bike also caused a slight indentation on the front right door.
Completo asserted that the accident and Albayda’s injuries were due to Albayda’s own negligence, as he failed to control his bicycle.
Completo maintained that Albayda had no valid claim and was only filing the complaint to harass petitioners and unjustly enrich himself at their expense.
Completo Witnesses’ Testimonies:
Redentor Completo:
Employed by FOJS Transport owned by Abiad since February 1997.
Claimed that on August 27, 1997, Albayda’s bicycle bumped the rear right side of his taxi at the intersection of 8th and 11th Streets.
The bicycle was travelling from south to north, and he was going east coming from the west.
Denied stopping 10 meters away from the accident, stated he immediately helped Albayda and took him to the hospital.
Benjamin Panican (Air Conditioner Technician):
Worked near the intersection where the accident occurred.
Testified that Albayda’s bicycle hit the rear right side of the taxicab.
Saw Completo carry Albayda and take him to the hospital.
Stated the bicycle was moving fast when the accident happened.
Elpidio Abiad (Taxi Operator):
Owned the taxicab and testified to employing Completo after a thorough background check, which included reviewing his bio-data, NBI clearance, and driver’s license.
Abiad averred that Completo was a good driver and a good man, who had no prior accidents since his employment in February 1997.
Trial Court: Ruled in favor of Albayda and ordered Completo and Abiad to pay:
₱46,000.00 in actual damages.
₱400,000.00 in moral damages.
₱25,000.00 in attorney’s fees.
CA: Affirmed the trial court’s decision with modifications:
Deleted the ₱46,000.00 in actual damages.
Awarded ₱40,000.00 in temperate damages instead.
Reduced moral damages to ₱200,000.00.
Imposed solidary liability on Completo and Abiad for temperate and moral damages, plus attorney’s fees.
Issues:
Whether the CA erred in finding that Completo was the one who caused the collision; NO
Whether Abiad failed to prove that he observed the diligence of a good father of the family; YES
Whether the award of moral and temperate damages and attorney’s fees to Albayda had no basis. (₱100,000.00 for temperate damages; ₱500,000.00 moral damages)
Held:
The petition is bereft of merit.
I. On Negligence
The issues raised by petitioners essentially delve into factual matters which were already passed upon by the RTC and the CA. Conclusions and findings of fact of the trial court are entitled to great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless for strong and cogent reasons, because the trial court is in a better position to examine real evidence, as well as to observe the demeanor of the witnesses while testifying in the case. The fact that the CA adopted the findings of fact of the trial court makes the same binding upon this Court. Well-settled is the rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. To be sure, findings of fact of lower courts are deemed conclusive and binding upon the Supreme Court, save only for clear and exceptional reasons, none of which is present in the case at bar.
The instant case involved a collision between a taxicab and a bicycle which resulted in serious physical injuries to the bicycle rider, Albayda. It is a rule in negligence suits that the plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of evidence the motorist’s breach in his duty of care owed to the plaintiff, that the motorist was negligent in failing to exercise the diligence required to avoid injury to the plaintiff, and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury suffered.
Article 2176 of the Civil Code provides that whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no preexisting contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict. In this regard, the question of the motorist's negligence is a question of fact.
It was proven by a preponderance of evidence that Completo failed to exercise reasonable diligence in driving the taxicab because he was over-speeding at the time he hit the bicycle ridden by Albayda. Such negligence was the sole and proximate cause of the serious physical injuries sustained by Albayda. Completo did not slow down even when he approached the intersection of 8th and 11th Streets of VAB. It was also proven that Albayda had the right of way, considering that he reached the intersection ahead of Completo.
The bicycle occupies a legal position that is at least equal to that of other vehicles lawfully on the highway, and it is fortified by the fact that usually more will be required of a motorist than a bicyclist in discharging his duty of care to the other because of the physical advantages the automobile has over the bicycle.
At the slow speed of ten miles per hour, a bicyclist travels almost fifteen feet per second, while a car traveling at only twenty-five miles per hour covers almost thirty-seven feet per second, and split-second action may be insufficient to avoid an accident. It is obvious that a motor vehicle poses a greater danger of harm to a bicyclist than vice versa. Accordingly, while the duty of using reasonable care falls alike on a motorist and a bicyclist, due to the inherent differences in the two vehicles, more care is required from the motorist to fully discharge the duty than from the bicyclist. Simply stated, the physical advantages that the motor vehicle has over the bicycle make it more dangerous to the bicyclist than vice versa.
Under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, the obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one’s own acts or omissions, but also for those persons for whom one is responsible. Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees, but the employers’ responsibility shall cease upon proof that they observed all the diligence of a good father of the family in the selection and supervision of their employees.
When an injury is caused by the negligence of an employee, a legal presumption instantly arises that the employer was negligent. This presumption may be rebutted only by a clear showing on the part of the employer that he exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of his employee. If the employer successfully overcomes the legal presumption of negligence, he is relieved of liability. In other words, the burden of proof is on the employer.
The trial court’s finding that Completo failed to exercise reasonable care to avoid collision with Albayda at the intersection of 11th and 8th Streets of VAB gives rise to liability on the part of Completo, as driver, and his employer Abiad. The responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for quasi-delict is solidary. The civil liability of the employer for the negligent acts of his employee is also primary and direct, owing to his own negligence in selecting and supervising his employee. The civil liability of the employer attaches even if the employer is not inside the vehicle at the time of the collision.
In the selection of prospective employees, employers are required to examine them as to their qualifications, experience, and service records.
On the other hand, with respect to the supervision of employees, employers should formulate standard operating procedures, monitor their implementation, and impose disciplinary measures for breaches thereof.
To establish these factors in a trial involving the issue of vicarious liability, employers must submit concrete proof, including documentary evidence.
Abiad testified that before he hired Completo, he required the latter to show his bio-data, NBI clearance, and driver’s license. Abiad likewise stressed that Completo was never involved in a vehicular accident prior to the instant case, and that, as operator of the taxicab, he would wake up early to personally check the condition of the vehicle before it is used.
The protestation of Abiad to escape liability is short of the diligence required under the law. Abiad’s evidence consisted entirely of testimonial evidence, and the unsubstantiated and self-serving testimony of Abiad was insufficient to overcome the legal presumption that he was negligent in the selection and supervision of his driver.
II. On Damages
The CA rightfully deleted the award of actual damages by the RTC because Albayda failed to present documentary evidence to establish with certainty the amount that he incurred during his hospitalization and treatment for the injuries he suffered. In the absence of stipulation, actual damages are awarded only for such pecuniary loss suffered that was duly proved.
While the amount of actual damages was not duly established with certainty, the Court recognizes the fact that, indeed, Albayda incurred a considerable amount for the necessary and reasonable medical expenses, loss of salary and wages, loss of capacity to earn increased wages, cost of occupational therapy, and harm from conditions caused by prolonged immobilization. Temperate damages, more than nominal but less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be proved with certainty. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the circumstances. Thus, the Court finds the award of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱100,000.00) as temperate damages reasonable under the circumstances.
Doubtless, Albayda suffered immeasurable pain because of the incident caused by petitioners’ negligence. The CA explained:
The court vicariously feels the pain the plaintiff [Albayda] suffered a number of times. After he was bumped by defendants’ cab, he cried in pain. When the doctors bore holes into his left knee, he cried in pain. When he was tractioned, when he was subjected to an operation after operation he suffered pain. When he took the witness stand to testify, he walked with crutches, his left knee in bandage, stiff and unfuctional. Pain was written [on] his face. He does deserve moral damages.
Moral damages are awarded in quasi-delicts causing physical injuries. The permanent deformity and the scar left by the wounds suffered by Albayba will forever be a reminder of the pain and suffering that he had endured and continues to endure because of petitioners’ negligence. Thus, the award of moral damages in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱500,000.00) is proper.
Finally, an interest rate of six percent (6%) per annum is due on the amount of ₱100,000.00, as temperate damages, and ₱500,000.00, as moral damages, which we have awarded. The 6% per annum interest rate on the temperate and moral damages shall commence to run from the date of the promulgation of this Decision. Upon finality of the Decision, an interest rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum shall be imposed on the amount of the temperate and moral damages until full payment thereof.
The award of attorney’s fees is hereby deleted for failure to prove that petitioners acted in bad faith in refusing to satisfy respondent’s just and valid claim.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Decision dated January 2, 2006 and the Resolution dated March 30, 2006 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 68405 are hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION, viz.:
(1) The estate of the late Redentor Completo and Elpidio Abiad are solidarily liable to pay One Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱100,000.00), as temperate damages, and Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱500,000.00), as moral damages;
(2) The temperate and moral damages hereby awarded shall earn legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of the promulgation of this Decision. Upon finality of this Decision, an interest rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum shall be imposed on the amount of the temperate and moral damages until full payment thereof.
Costs against petitioners.
SO ORDERED.
Comments
Post a Comment