Torts and Damages Notes Outline 4 (part 4 Moral Damages)

2. Moral

a. Concept

Civil Code
Art. 2177
Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant.
  • Kierulf v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: P antranco bus driven by Jose Malanum lost control and swerved to the left flying over the center island occupying the east-bound lane of EDSA.  The front of the bus hit the front of the Isuzu pickup driven by Legaspi smashed to pieces and inflicting physical injury to Legaspi and his passenger Lucila Kierulf. Both were treated at the Quezon City General Hospital. The bus also hit and injured a pedestrian who was then crossing EDSA. Despite the impact, the bus continued to move forward and its front portion rammed against a Caltex gasoline station, damaging its building and gasoline dispensing equipment.  RTC: proximate cause was the negligence of Jose Malanum. Pantranco North Express to pay Lucila Kierulf, Victor Kierulf for the damages of the Isuzu pick-up and Porfirio Legaspi. CA: Affirmed with modification by adding P25,000 attorney's fees and to pay costs. SC: AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.  The award of moral damages to Lucila and Legaspi is  INCREASED to P400,000.00 and P50,000 respectively; exemplary damages to Lucila is INCREASED to P200,000.  Legaspi is awarded exemplary damages of P50,000.
    • Doctrines: 
      • Moral damage 
        • for social and financial standing
          • includes: 
            • rude and rough reception
            • menacing attitude
            • supercilious manner
            • abusive language and highly scornful reference
          • awarded only if he or she was subjected to contemptuous conduct despite the offender's knowledge of his or her social and financial standing
        • for physical sufferings, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety and wounded feelings.. sleepless nights and shock 
      • Exemplary damages
        • designed to permit the courts to mould behavior that has socially deleterious consequences, and its imposition is required by public policy to suppress the wanton acts of an offender
        • discretion of the court
        • (1) They may be imposed by way of example or correction only in addition, among others, to compensatory damages, and cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to the claimant
        • (2) the claimant must first establish his right to moral, temporate, liquidated or compensatory damages
        • (3) the wrongful act must be accompanied by bad faith, and the award would be allowed only if the guilty party acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner
        • though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of defendant
        • there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like.  
          • While no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, the amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the court it is nevertheless essential that the claimant should satisfactorily show the existence of the factual basis of damages and its causal connection to defendant's acts.  
        • Purpose: 
          • awarded to enable the injured party to obtain Means, Diversions or Amusements (MAD) that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he/she has undergone, by reason of  the defendant's culpable action
          • aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the spiritual status quo ante; thus, it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted
            • should not be so palpably and scandalously excessive as to indicate that it was the result of passion, prejudice or corruption on the part of the trial judge
            • Neither should it be so little or so paltry that it rubs salt to the injury already inflicted on plaintiffs
b. Proof and Proximate Cause
  • Miranda-Ribaya and Carbonell v. Bautista (1980)
    • Summary: Mrs. Ribaya was made to believe that Mr. Bautista was a millionaire logger.  Mr. Bautista issued several checks for jewelries which was dishonored due to closed account.  Mrs. Ribaya soon found out that it was pawned to different pawnshops.  She pleaded with Mr. Bautista and was able to retrieve the pawn tickets one by one and in the process of taking them back she incurred debts and her pawn shop had to close down.  RTC: favored Mrs. Ribaya for P125,460.79 plus 25% attorney's fees but did not grant moral and exemplary damages CA: affirmed RTC. SC: further awarded moral and exemplary damages 25% of P125,460.79
    • Doctrines:
      • In awarding moral damages, there should be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright
        • does not need to be the precise legal terms or "sacramental phrases" of "mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, wounded feelings or moral shock" and the like
      • exemplary damages given even in breach of civil contract
  • Del Rosario v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: The Spouses Del Rosario through their contractor Engineer Puno purchased roofing from Metal Forming Corp. who advertised their metal shingles to be able to withstand strong wind.  But, the roofings installed where not according to those specified and was blown by Typhoon Ruping 2 months later.  RTC: favored Spouses Del Rosario Actual damage P1,008,003, Moral Damages P500,000, Exemplary Damages P300,000 and Attorney's fees and expenses of litigation P150,000 CA: reversed holding there is no privity bet. the Spouses Del Rosario and MFC SC: REINSTATED AND AFFIRMED, with the modification that the award of actual damages and attorney's fees is deleted, and the moral and exemplary damages awarded are reduced from P500,000 to P100,000, and from P300,000 to P50,000, respectively.
    • Laws: Article 2229 , Article 2208 of the Civil Code
    • Doctrines: 
      • Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but must be duly proved and proved with reasonable degree of certainty. 
        • relied only on the report of the Esteban Adjusters and Valuers, Inc. which contains no statement whatever of the amount of the damage 
      • law explicitly authorizes the award of moral damages in breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith
      • The power of the court to award attorney's fees under Article 2208 of the Civil Code demands factual, legal, and equitable justification; its basis cannot be left to speculation or conjecture. Where granted. the court must explicitly state in the body of the decision, and not only in the dispositive portion thereof, the legal reason for the award of attorney's fees
  • Raagas v. Traya (1968)
    • Summary:  Octavio Traya recklessly driving a truck owned by Canciller ran over the 3-year old son of the spouses Melquiades Raagas and Adela Laudiano Raagas causing his instantaneous death.  Spouses Raagas prayed for actual damages of P10,000, moral, nominal and corrective damages, P1,000 as attorney's fees, P1,000 for expenses of litigation, plus costs.  RTC: Traya and Bienvenido Canciller jointly and severally liable P10,000 for the death of their child Regino Laudiano Raagas, P2,000 for moral damages, P1,000 actual damages, P1,000 for attorney's fees, and the costs.  Traya and Canciller appealed to CA, which certified the case to the SC because the issues raised are purely of law. SC: hereby remanded to the court of origin for trial on the merits
    • Doctrines:
      • even if the allegations regarding the amount of damages in the complaint are not specifically denied in the answer, such damages are not deemed admitted
      • an allegation is not necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded,  but it is, nevertheless, essential that the claimant satisfactorily prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage and its causal relation to defendant's acts
  • Enervida v. dela Torre (1974)
    • Summary: Roque Enervida filed a complaint against spouses Lauro de la Torre and Rosa de la Torre praying that the deed of sale executed by his deceased father, Ciriaco Enervida, over a parcel of land covered by a Homestead Patent be declared null and void for having been executed within the prohibited period of five years, in violation of the provision, of Section 118 of Commonwealth Act 141, otherwise known as the Public Land Law.  He further prayed that he be allowed to repurchase said parcel of land for being the legitimate son and sole heir of his deceased father RTC: dismissed CA: sale had been made in 1948 - 7 yrs after therefore beyond the 5-year phobitive period is valid SC: Dismissal order is hereby affirmed with the modification that only attorney's fees in the amount of P1,500 are hereby awarded to the respondents
    • Laws Applicable: Article 2208 of the Civil Code
    • Doctrines: 
      • clearly unfounded suit, which is expressly mentioned in Art. 2208 (par. 4), as justifying an award of attorney's fees, but is not included in the enumeration of Art. 2219 in respect to moral damages
  • People v. Bagayong (1998)
    • Summary: Boy asked Arlene , 11-years old, to hold his penis and when it was already hard and stiff placed it inside the mouth of Arlene and a white substance came out.  This was in the presence of Catherine who was 6 years old who was the one who told Leticia.  Leticia filed complained with the NBI.  Arlene testified that Boy had been doing the same since she was 9 years old.  They were times when Boy would insert his penis and when the white substance came out, he would pull it out. RTC: guilty of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness committed on October 15, 1994 and he is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 6 months of arresto mayor as minimum to 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional as maximum, and of the crime of Rape he committed in 1993 for which he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.  SC: AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that Bugayong is ordered to pay Complainant Arlene Cauan P50,000 as indemnity and the additional amount of P50,000 as moral damages, or a total of P100,000
    • Doctrines:
      • moral damages may additionally be awarded to the victim in the criminal proceeding, in such amount as the Court deems just, without the need for pleading or proof of the basis thereof as has heretofore been the practice
c. Cases where allowed



Civil Code
Art. 2219
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases:

(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries;

(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries;

(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts;

(4) Adultery or concubinage;

(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest;

(6) Illegal search;

(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation;

(8) Malicious prosecution;

(9) Acts mentioned in Article 309;

(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and 35.

The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also recover moral damages.
The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the order named.
Art. 2220
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for awarding moral damages if the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages are justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.


  • Francisco v. GSIS(1963)
    • Summary: Francisco proposed to redeem her foreclosed property to which GSIS agreed. Subsequenty, GSIS was asking for  attorney's fees of P35,644.14, publication expenses, filing fee of P301.00, and surcharge of P23.64 for the foreclosure done. RTC: Atty. Francisco's offer was unqualifiedly accepted, and was binding SC: affirmed. 
    • Doctrines:
      • breach of contract, not being malicious or fraudulent, does not warrant the award of moral damages under Article 2220 of the Civil Code
  • Expert Travel v. CA (1999)
    • Summary: Expert travel & Tours, Inc. issued to Ricardo Lo 4 round-trip plane tickets for Hongkong with hotel accommodations and transfers for P39,677.20 and filed for recovery. CA affirmed RTC: Lo remitted the Monte de Piedad Check for P42,175.20 to Expert's chairperson Ms. Ma. Rocio de Vega who in turn issued City Trust Check of P50,000. SC: petition is GRANTED and the award of moral damages to respondent Ricardo Lo under the assailed decision is DELETED.
    • Laws: Article 2219, Article 1764, Article 2206
    • Doctrines:
      • An award of moral damages would require certain conditions to be met; to wit: 
        • (1) there must be an injury, whether physical, mental or psychological, clearly sustained by the claimant
        • (2) there must be a culpable act or omission factually established
        • (3) the wrongful act or omission of the defendant is the proximate cause of the injury sustained by the claimant
        • (4) the award of damages is predicated on any of the cases stated in Article 2219
      • in culpa contractual or breach of contract:
        • moral damages may be recovered when the defendant acted in bad faith or was guilty of gross negligence (amounting to bad faith) or in wanton disregard of his contractual obligation and, exceptionally, when the act of breach of contract itself is constitutive of tort resulting in physical injuries
      • By special rule in Article 1764, in relation to Article 2206, of the Civil Code
        • moral damages may also be awarded in case the death of a passenger results from a breach of carriage
      • In culpa aquiliana, or quasi-delict and contracts when breached by tort
        • (a) when an act or omission causes physical injuries, or 
        • (b) where the defendant is guilty of intentional tort
      • In culpa criminal
        • moral damages could be lawfully due when the accused is found guilty of physical injuries, lascivious acts, adultery or concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention, illegal arrest, illegal search, or defamation
      • Malicious prosecution can also give rise to a claim for moral damages
      • The term "analogous cases," referred to in Article 2219, following the ejusdem generis rule, must be held similar to those expressly enumerated by the law
      • Excludes clearly unfounded civil suit
i. Unfounded Suits
  • Mijares v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: Metro Drug filed a recovery against Mijares when it was suppose to be against Solomon. RTC: dismissed Metro Drug, Inc. to pay P30,000 for moral damages, P10,000 as attorney's fees and cost of suit since not delivered to Mijares  CA: reversed. SC: RTC reinstated only as to the dismissal
    • Doctrines:
      • failed to show motivated by bad faith when it instituted the action for collection 
      • Malicious prosecution, both in criminal and civil cases, 
        • requires the presence of two elements, to wit: 
          • a) malice; and 
          • b) absence of probable cause.
        • Moreover, there must be proof that the prosecution was prompted by a sinister design to vex and humiliate a person, and that it was initiated deliberately knowing that the charge was false and baseless
      • For the same reasons, the award for attorney's fees and expenses of litigation must likewise be deleted 
  • De la Peña v. CA (1994)
    • Summary: De la Peña filed an action for reconveyance with damages with the RTC alleging that Ricardo Tan amended to Herotido Tan used fraud and misrepresentation but it was baseless.  RTC: rejected. counterclaim was granted and Dela Peña was ordered to pay P6,000 attorney's fees and expenses of litigation, P15,000 for moral damages and the costs of the proceedings. CA: affirmed SC: FFIRMED, with the sole modification that the award for attorney's fees, expenses of litigation, and moral damages is DELETED
    • Doctrines: 
      • award for attorney's fees and moral damages  is unfounded in the absence of a deliberate intent to cause prejudice to the other party. The right to litigate is so precious that a Penalty should not be charged on those who may exercise it erroneously
  • J Marketing v. Sia (1998)
    • Summary: J Marketing filed a replevin suit against Sia for the recovery of its lost motorcycle but it was not proven. RTC: dismissed but awarded damages and attorney’s fees to Sia CA: affirmed SC: AFFIRMED WITH THE MODIFICATION that the award of damages, attorney’s fees and cost to private respondent is deleted
    • Doctrines:
      • it cannot be said that the institution of the replevin suit was tainted with gross and evident bad faith or was done maliciously to harass, embarrass, annoy or ridicule private respondent.
      • No damages can be charged on those who may exercise such precious right in good faith, even if done erroneously.
      • There being no bad faith reflected in petitioner’s persistence in pursuing its case, other than an erroneous conviction of the righteousness of its cause, attorney’s fees cannot be recovered as cost.
  • Cometa v. CA (1999)
    • Summary: After HBI was acquitted from the charge of falsification of documents,  it filed a complaint for malicious prosecution against petitioners Cometa and SITI alleging that it was filed with the sole intent of harassing and pressuring Guevara, in his capacity as chairman of GIDC, to give in to their illicit and malicious desire to appropriate the remaining unsold properties of GIDC. Cometa and SITI answered that the action seeks to impose a penalty on the right to litigate and for that reason is unconstitutional and against settled public policy.  RTC and CA: denied since without malice SC: affirmed
    • Doctrines:
      • It is hardly necessary to say that to allow the present action to proceed is not to impose a penalty on the right to litigate. For trial is still to be conducted and liability is not automatic.
      • Just as it is bad to encourage the indiscriminate filing of actions for damages by accused persons after they have been acquitted, whether correctly or incorrectly, a blanket clearance of all who may be minded to charge others with offenses, fancied or otherwise, without any chance of the aggrieved parties in the appropriate cases of false accusation to obtain relief, is in Our Opinion short of being good law
ii. Labor Cases


  • Triple Eight v. NLRC (1998)
    • Summary: Osdana filed a case against its Triple Eight for sending her to Saudi Arabia to do tedious work at long hours different from the contract she signed that she was to work as a waitress.  She suffered and was operated for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome because of the hard labor and was terminated after her operation on the ground of illness. She was also made to work without compensation and to not work for no reason at all.  labor arbiter: favored Osdana holding Triple Eight liable for US$2,499.00 as salaries for the unexpired portion of the contract, and US$1,076.00 as unpaid salary and salary differential, or its equivalent in Philippine Peso and P50,000 moral damages, P20,000 exemplary damages and 10% of the monetary award as attorney's fee. NLRC: affirmed. SC: AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the award to Osdana should be US$1,260 as salaries for the unexpired portion of the employment contract, and US$1,076, representing unpaid salaries for 7 months and underpaid salary for 1 month, plus interest. P30,000 moral damages, P10,000 exemplary damages and 10% attorney's fees.
    • Doctrines:
      • moral damages are recoverable where the dismissal of the employee was attended by bad faith or fraud or constituted an act oppressive to labor, or was done in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy. Likewise, exemplary damages may be awarded if the dismissal was effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner. Since the employer is deemed to have acted in bad faith, the award for attorney's fees is likewise upheld.
iii. Taking of Life


  • People v. Pirame (2000)
    • Summary: Cipriano Supero saw Pedro Torrenueva being held by Florencio Perame was struck with an iron pipe by Epifanio Cleopas and Teodorico Cleopas with a piece of wood hitting him in the forehead so he fell on the ground dead.  He was then buried in the well near the house of Demetrio Cleopas, father of the accused.   RTC: Teodorico Cleopas and Florencio Pirame guilty of the crime of murder punished under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced each one of them to suffer an imprisonment of RECLUSION PERPETUA, with the accessories of the law and to pay the cost.  Ordering them to indemnify surviving spouse P50,000 each and 23,214 for burial and incidental expenses and P50,000 each for moral and exemplary damages and in all instances without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Deducting time for preventive imprisonment. SC: AFFIRMED, but the award of P50,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages is hereby DELETED
    • Doctrines: 
      • No moral damages were widow did not testify on any mental anguish or emotional distress, which she suffered as a result of her husband's death
      • absence of any generic aggravating circumstance attending the crime likewise precludes the award of exemplary damages 
  • Carlos Arcona y Moban v. CA (2002)
    • Summary: Napoleon Ong and Edgardo Talanquines were walking along the national highway at Barangay Labog, Brooke’s Point, Palawan, on their way home after coming from a birthday party.  When Carlos Arcona y Moban and his brother Benito Arcona y Moban confederating together and mutually helping one another, with intent to kill and with evident premeditation and treachery assault, strike and beat with a bamboo pole Edgardo Talanquines who managed to escape and seek medical assistance thereby preventing his death.  They also stabbed Napoleon Ong with a bladed weapon causing his immediate death.  RTC: Carlos Arcona y Moban guilty of the crime of Homicide under Art. 249 of the Revised Penal Code, with the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender to authorities and no aggravating circumstances.  He is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 6 YEARS and 1 DAY of PRISION MAYOR as MINIMUM to 14 YEARS and 1 DAY OF RECLUSION TEMPORAL as MAXIMUM, and to indemnify the heirs of Napoleon Ong P30,000 for his death, P10,000 actual damages and P10,000 moral damages. Benito Arcona is acquitted.  Benito Arcona is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Slight Physical injuries 20 DAYS of ARRESTO MENOR and to indemnify Edgardo Talanquines 10,000 as actual damages. CA: Affirms increases indemnity to P50,000 SC: AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION increased moral damages to P50,000.  actual damages is deleted
    • Doctrines:
      • As borne out by human nature and experience, a violent death invariably and necessarily brings about emotional pain and anguish on the part of the victim’s family. It is inherently human to suffer sorrow, torment, pain and anger when a loved one becomes the victim of a violent or brutal killing. Such violent death or brutal killing not only steals from the family of the deceased his precious life, deprives them forever of his love, affection and support, but often leaves them with the gnawing feeling that an injustice has been done to them. For this reason, moral damages must be awarded even in the absence of any allegation and proof of the heirs’ emotional suffering
  • NOTE: In Carlos Arcona case, no need to allege in case of death while in People v. Pirame have to allege.
d. Factors in determining amount
  • PNB v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: PNB foreclosed the property assigned by Industrial Enterprises, Inc. (IEI) to Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corporation (MMIC) despite being notified by IEI.  
    • RTC: granted. PNB is equally guilty of bad faith because it was advised beforehand that the heavy equipment and movable property which are part of the Giporlos Coal Project were still unpaid.  MMIC and PNB jointly and solidarily liable to pay moral damages P300,000,exemplary damages P200,000 and P200,000 attorney's fees.  CA: reversed.  IEI's claim against PNB for actual, consequential and moral damages including attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit, has neither legal nor factual bases. SC: REVERSED and SET ASIDE insofar as it renders petitioner solidarily liable with Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corporation for damages and AFFIRMED insofar as it nullifies the foreclosure sale of August 31, 1984. 
    • Doctrines:
      • In view of the noninvolvement of petitioner in the alleged conspiracy to strip private respondent of the its rights over the Giporlos Project, petitioner cannot be made solidarily liable with the MMIC for damages
  • Fule v. CA (1998)
    • Summary: Fule and Dr. Cruz with the assistance of Atty. Belarmino engaged in a barter wherein 10 hectare of land in Tanay, Rizal of Fule will be exchanged for the emerald-cut diamond earrings of Dr. Cruz.  2 hours after the exchange, Fule alleged that it was fake taking back the compensation of Remelia Dichoso and Oliva Mendoza as his agents who looked for the buyer of his lot.   RTC: Fule reported it 2 hours later is considered unreasonable delay and finding him with wanton bad faith so award of attorney's fees was warranted. Dra. Cruz runs her own hospital and defendant Belarmino is a well respected legal practitioner so their reputations were besmirched. SC and CA: affirmed 
    • Doctrines: 
      • Moral and exemplary damages may be awarded without proof of pecuniary loss. In awarding such damages, the court shall take into account the circumstances obtaining in the case said assess damages according to its discretion. To warrant the award of damages, it must be shown that the person to whom these are awarded has sustained injury. He must likewise establish sufficient data upon which the court can properly base its estimate of the amount of damages. Statements of facts should establish such data rather than mere conclusions or opinions of witnesses.
      • While, as a rule, moral damages cannot be recovered from a person who has filed a complaint against another in good faith because it is not sound policy to place a penalty on the right to litigate, the same, however, cannot apply in the case at bar
        • he filed the action for the nullification of the contract of sale with unclean hands, all deserve full faith and credit to support the conclusion that petitioner was motivated more by ill will than a sincere attempt to protect his rights in commencing suit against respondents
  • Philippine Airlines v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: Pantejo's flight was delayed due to typhoon Osang but PAL refused to shoulder his hotel expenses.  Soon he found out that some of his co-passengers were reimbursed for their hotel expenses so he filed a case for damages because of the discrimnation. RTC: Ordered PAL to pay P300 actual damages, P150,000 moral damages, P100,000 exemplary damages, P15,000 attorney’s fees, and 6% interest from the time of the filing of the complaint until paid, plus costs of suit CA: affirmed but deleted attorney’s fees and litigation expenses. SC: AFFIRMED, subject to the MODIFICATION regarding the computation of the 6% legal rate of interest on the monetary awards.
    • Doctrines:
      • Under the peculiar circumstances of this case, we are convinced that the awards for actual, moral and exemplary damages granted in the judgment of respondent court, for the reasons meticulously analyzed and thoroughly explained in its decision, are just and equitable.
  • Valenzuela v. CA (1997) (see previous)
    • Doctrines:
      • As the amount of moral damages are subject to this Court’s discretion, we are of the opinion that the amount of P1,000,000.00 granted by the trial court is in greater accord with the extent and nature of the injury -. physical and psychological - suffered by Valenzuela as a result of Li’s grossly negligent driving of his Mitsubishi Lancer in the early morning hours of the accident.
        • the damage done to her would not only be permanent and lasting, it would also be permanently changing and adjusting to the physiologic changes which her body would normally undergo through the years. The replacements, changes, and adjustments will require corresponding adjustive physical and occupational therapy. All of these adjustments, it has been documented, are painful.
  • Sumaplong v. CA (1997)
    • Summary: Arsolo Ramos and his wife Leonarda were on their way home from their ricefield when Aurelio Sumalpong asked Leonarda if she knew who stoned his house. Leonarda told him to determine first who did it.  But, Aurelio angered slapped Leonarda causing her to fall to the ground and while on her hands and knees shot her on the back of her head with a .38 caliber revolver killing her.  Arsolo rushed towards Aurelio who shot him twice but missed.  While grappling, Aurelio bit Arsolo's forearm and left ear causing a mutilation. RTC: convicting the Aurelio of the crime of attempted homicide and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment from 6 months and 1 day of arresto mayor as minimum to 2 years, 4 months and 1 day of prision correccional as maximum. The petitioner was likewise ordered to indemnify the complainant in the amount of: (a) P16,800 for the loss of his crops due to his failure to attend to his farmwork because of the injuries inflicted upon him by the petitioner; (b) P2,000 for hospitalization expenses and (c) P5,000 by way of moral damages CA: increased moral damages to P10,000 and adding nominal damages P10,000. SC: Affirmed CA
    • Doctrines:
      • Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.
      • whenever there has been a violation of an ascertained legal right, although no actual damages resulted or none are shown, the award of nominal damages is proper
      • in the absence of competent proof of the amount of actual damages,  the complainant is entitled only to nominal damages.
      • Anent the increase in the amount of moral damages suffice it to state that the nature of the injuries and the degree of physical suffering endured by the complainant warrants the same. The tragic incident caused a mutilation of complainant's left ear and a permanent scar on his right forearm. These injuries have left indelible marks on the complainant's body and will serve as a constant reminder of this traumatic experience.
  • Lopez v. Pan American (1966)
    • Summary: Due to an illegal strike out, Pan Am forced its employees to take 2 days leave without pay.   court a quo: affected them financially and economically, it ordered Pan America to pay them their two days salaries. CA: affirmed. SC: AFFIRMED in so far as it declares petitioner Pan American World Airways, Inc. not guilty of unfair labor practice, but IS REVERSED in so far as it orders said petitioner to pay the members of the respondent labor union, Pan American Employees Association, their wages or salaries for February 22 and 23, 1961 when they were made by the petitioner to go on furlough. The petitioner is absolved from paying the said back wages. No pronouncement as to costs. It is so ordered.
    • Doctrines:
      • The dismiss employee is not entirely without remedy if his charge of unfair labor practice fails and his complaint dismissed, because the breach by the employer of the obligation to him may be redressed like an ordinary contract or obligation
      • Inasmuch as petitioner acted in good faith, it should not be ordered to pay back wages to its laid off employees. 
      • not paid their wages for only two days, We do not believe that the same would place them in such a financial and economic distress as to warrant the award of their back wages
  • Producer's Bank v. CA (2001)
    • Summary: Salvador Chua was offered by Mr. Jimmy Rojas, manager of Producers Bank of the Philippines to transfer his account from Pacific Banking Corporation to Producers Bank.  Chua did and was able to obtain a loan for P2,000,000 which was secured by a real estate mortgage and payable within a period of 3 years or from 1982 to 1985.  January 20, 1984: Chua deposited with Producers Bank P960,000 which was entered into their savings account passbook but failed to credit it because Sixto Castillo, absconded with the money. Producers Bank dishonored the checks drawn by Chua in favor of various creditors.  Although his balance was P1,051,051.19.  RTC: favored Chua ordering Producers to pay P2,000,000 moral damages, with legal rate of interest; P90,000/month and P18,000/month unrealized profits from his cement and gasoline station business, to commence from October 16, 1984, with legal rate of interest until fully paid; P250,000 exemplary damages.  Offset the P960,000 with his agricultural loan of P1,300,000 with 14% interest, to commence from January 4, 1984, covered by a real estate mortgage, both of which shall have a cut-off time frame on the date of this decision.  Loan of P175,000 and the clean loan of P400,000 without interest shall be off-settled by the moral, actual and compensatory damages. 15% of moral, actual and compensatory damages as attorney's fees. Cost of suit. CA: modified moral damages to P500,000. P100,000.00 attorney's fees SC: affirmed with MODIFICATION. P300,000 moral damages. P150,000 exemplary damages. P100,000 attorney's fees and litigation expenses.
    • Doctrines:
      • There are two kinds of actual or compensatory damages:
        • loss of what a person already possesses
        • failure to receive as a benefit that which would have pertained to him
          • damages consisting of unrealized profits, frequently referred as "ganacias frustradas" or "lucrum cessans," are not to be granted on the basis of mere speculation, conjecture, or surmise, but rather by reference to some reasonably definite standard such as market value, established experienced, or direct inference from known circumstances
        • When the existence of a loss is established, absolute certainty as to its amount is not required. The benefit to be derived from a contract which one of the parties has absolutely failed to perform is of necessity to some extent, a matter of speculation, but the injured party is not to be denied for that reason alone. He must produce the best evidence of which his case is susceptible and if that evidence warrants the inference that he has been damaged by the loss of profits which he might with reasonable certainty have anticipated but for the defendant's wrongful act, he is entitled to recover. 
e. Who may recover
  • Strebel v. Figueros (1954)
    • Summary: Strebel filed a complaint among others that Figeuros used his official and political position to remove his wife's son-in-law from his position. RTC: Dismissed SC: Affirmed. Strebel is not even related to Dr. Hernandez whose wife is a daughter of Mrs. Strebel by a previous marriage
    • Doctrines:
      • GR: Right of recovery for mental suffering resulting from bodily injuries is restricted to the person who has suffered the bodily hurt, and there can be no recovery for distress caused by sympathy for another's suffering, or for fright due to a wrong against a third person. 
        • So the anguish of mind arising as to the safety of others who may be in personal peril from the same cause cannot be taken into consideration
        • a husband or wife cannot recover for mental suffering caused by his or her sympathy for the other's suffering
  • ABS-CBN v. CA (1999)
    • Summary: VIVA offered its film rights to ABS-CBN but the deal did not push through so it sold it to RBS for P60M.  RTC: Issued TRO against RBS in showing 14 films as filed by ABS-CBN. RBS also set up a cross-claim against VIVA. RTC: ordered ABS-CBN to pay RBS P107,727 premium paid by RBS to the surety which issued their bond to lift the injunction, P191,843.00 for the amount of print advertisement for "Maging Sino Ka Man" in various newspapers, P1M attorney's fees, P5M moral damages, P5M exemplary damages and costs.  Cross-claim to VIVA was dismissed.   ABS-CBN appealed. VIVA and Del Rosario also appealed seeking moral and exemplary damages and additional attorney's fees. CA: reduced the awards of moral damages to P2M, exemplary damages to P2M and attorney's fees to P500,000.  Denied VIVA and Del Rosario's appeal because it was RBS and not VIVA which was actually prejudiced when the complaint was filed by ABS-CBN.  SC: REVERSED except as to unappealed award of attorney's fees in favor of VIVA Productions, Inc.
    • Doctrines:
      • Can only filed for damage if actually prejudiced 
      • the claim of RBS for actual damages did not arise from contract, quasi-contract, delict, or quasi-delict. It arose from the fact of filing of the complaint despite ABS-CBN's alleged knowledge of lack of cause of action.  Needless to state the award of actual damages cannot be comprehended under the above law on actual damages. RBS could only probably take refuge under Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code. 
      • The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of a corporation because, being an artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses, It cannot, therefore, experience physical suffering and mental anguish, which call be experienced only by one having a nervous system.  A corporation may recover moral damages if it "has a good reputation that is debased, resulting in social humiliation" is an obiter dictum. On this score alone the award for damages must be set aside, since RBS is a corporation.
      • There is no adequate proof that ABS-CBN was inspired by malice or bad faith.   If damages result from a person's exercise of a right, it is damnum absque injuria. 
  • National Power v. Philipp Brothers (2001)
    • Summary: PHIBRO had a delay in its delivery due to strikes so in the next bidding, it was not accepted by NAPOCOR.  RTC: favored PHIBRO. Ordering NAPCOR to reinstate PHIBRO as accredited bidder, to pay $864,000 actual damages, $100,000 moral damages, $50,000 exemplary damages, $73,231.91 reimbursement for expenses, cost of litigation and attorney's fees, cost of suit and dismissed counterclaim of NAPOCOR. CA: affirmed in toto. "Strikes" are undoubtedly included in the force majeure clause of the Bidding Terms and Specifications SC: Modified actual, moral and exemplary damages, reimbursement for expenses, cost of litigation and attorney's fees, and costs of suit, is DELETED
    • Doctrines:
      • Moral damages are granted in recompense for physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury. A corporation, being an artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation, has no feelings, no emotions, no senses; therefore, it cannot experience physical suffering and mental anguish. Mental suffering can be experienced only by one having a nervous system and it flows from real ills, sorrows, and griefs of life
      • a winning party may be awarded attorney's fees only in case plaintiff's action or defendant's stand is so untenable as to amount to gross and evident bad faith
3. Nominal

Civil Code
Art. 2221
Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.
Art. 2222
Art. 2222. The court may award nominal damages in every obligation arising from any source enumerated in Article 1157, or in every case where any property right has been invaded.
Art. 2223
Art. 2223. The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further contest upon the right involved and all accessory questions, as between the parties to the suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.
Ventanilla v. Centeno 1 SCRA 215
Robes-Francisco v. CFI 86 SCRA 59
People v. Gopio 346 SCRA 408
Armovit v. CA 184 SCRA 476

4. Temperate


Civil Code
Art. 2224
Art. 2224. Temperate or moderate damages, which are 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 can not, from the nature of the case, be provided with certainty.
Art. 2225
Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the circumstances.
Pleno v. CA G.R. No. 56505 (1988)
People v. Singh 360 SCRA 404
People v. Plazo 350 SCRA 433

5. Liquidated

Civil Code
Art. 2226
Art. 2226. Liquidated damages are those agreed upon by the parties to a contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof.
Art. 2227
Art. 2227. Liquidated damages, whether intended as an indemnity or a penalty, shall be equitably reduced if they are iniquitous or unconscionable.
Art. 2228
Art. 2228. When the breach of the contract committed by the defendant is not the one contemplated by the parties in agreeing upon the liquidated damages, the law shall determine the measure of damages, and not the stipulation.

6. Exemplary or Corrective

Civil Code
Art. 2229
Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
Art. 2230
Art. 2230. In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct from fines and shall be paid to the offended party.
Art. 2231
Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence.
Art. 2232
Art. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner.
Art. 2233
Art. 2233. Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right; the court will decide whether or not they should be adjudicated.
Art. 2234
Art. 2234. While the amount of the exemplary damages need not be proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. In case liquidated damages have been agreed upon, although no proof of loss is necessary in order that such liquidated damages may be recovered, nevertheless, before the court may consider the question of granting exemplary in addition to the liquidated damages, the plaintiff must show that he would be entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages were it not for the stipulation for liquidated damages.
Art. 2235
Art. 2235. A stipulation whereby exemplary damages are renounced in advance shall be null and void.
PNB v. CA 256 SCRA 44
Del Rosario v. CA 267 SCRA 158