CIVIL LAW: QUASI-DELICTS (XI. QUASI-DELICTS > A. PRINCIPLES)

Quasi-delicts, governed by Article 2176 to 2194 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, are a fundamental aspect of obligations arising from damages caused by negligence or fault. Below is a detailed discussion of the principles governing quasi-delicts:

1. Definition and Nature

Article 2176 of the Civil Code defines a quasi-delict as:

“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 pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.”

Key Points:

Essence: A quasi-delict involves an act or omission that is negligent or wrongful and results in damage to another, independent of contractual obligations.
Basis: The liability arises from a breach of the general duty of care owed to others under the principle of damnum absque injuria—"no one should cause harm to another."

2. Requisites for Quasi-Delict

To establish liability for a quasi-delict, the following requisites must concur:

Act or omission by the defendant.
Fault or negligence attributable to the defendant.
Damage caused to the plaintiff.
Causal connection between the act/omission and the damage.
Absence of pre-existing contractual relation between the parties.

3. Fault and Negligence

Fault (Culpa): Implies wrongful or intentional acts resulting in damage.
Negligence: Involves the omission of due diligence required in a given set of circumstances, as determined by the reasonable person test.

4. Liability for Quasi-Delicts

Quasi-delicts are premised on the legal obligation to repair harm caused to another. Liability under quasi-delicts can arise in several situations:

Personal Liability: The person committing the negligent act is directly liable.
Vicarious Liability: A third party may be held liable for the acts of another under specific circumstances (e.g., employer-employee relationships).

5. Vicarious Liability

Under Articles 2180 and 2181 of the Civil Code, liability may extend to third parties, subject to the following conditions:

Article 2180:

Employers are liable for damages caused by their employees, provided the acts are within the scope of their duties.
Parents are liable for damages caused by their unemancipated children living with them.
Guardians are liable for damages caused by minors or incapacitated persons under their authority.
Teachers and heads of establishments are liable for damages caused by students or apprentices under their supervision.

Presumption of Negligence:
In vicarious liability, the presumption of negligence lies with the supervising or responsible party, who must prove that proper diligence was exercised to prevent the damage.

6. Principle of Solidary Liability

Article 2194 of the Civil Code provides:

“The responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for a quasi-delict is solidary.”

Key Points:

When two or more persons are responsible for damage caused by a quasi-delict, their liability is solidary (joint and several).
This ensures full compensation to the injured party.

7. Damages in Quasi-Delicts

The party responsible for a quasi-delict is obligated to indemnify the injured party for all damages sustained. These include:

Actual Damages: To cover measurable pecuniary loss.
Moral Damages: For mental anguish, emotional suffering, or social humiliation.
Exemplary Damages: When the act is grossly negligent or shows wanton recklessness.
Nominal Damages: When no substantial loss occurred but a legal right was violated.
Temperate Damages: When the exact value of loss cannot be determined.
Attorney’s Fees and Litigation Expenses: If justified under Article 2208.

8. Defenses in Quasi-Delicts

A defendant may avoid liability by raising valid defenses:

Due Diligence: Proving reasonable care and diligence was exercised.
Contributory Negligence: If the plaintiff’s negligence contributed to the damage, it may reduce the liability.
Fortuitous Event: Unavoidable events beyond human control may absolve liability (force majeure).
Consent: When the injured party consented to the act causing the damage.

9. Relation to Other Legal Concepts

Quasi-Delict vs. Crime: While both involve wrongful acts, quasi-delicts are civil in nature and focus on indemnity, whereas crimes involve punishment and are prosecuted by the state.
Quasi-Delict vs. Breach of Contract: The former arises independent of a contractual relationship, whereas the latter is based on the breach of a contractual obligation.
Overlap with Criminal Negligence: A single negligent act can give rise to both criminal prosecution and civil liability, but they are pursued under separate legal remedies.

10. Application in Philippine Jurisprudence

The principles of quasi-delicts have been elucidated in numerous Supreme Court cases:

Barredo v. Garcia (1942): Distinguished quasi-delicts from crimes and established that civil liability under quasi-delict exists independently of criminal liability.
LBC v. CA (2005): Emphasized the liability of employers for quasi-delicts of employees when acting within the scope of employment.
Phoenix Construction v. IAC (1987): Defined the parameters of contributory negligence in reducing damages.

Conclusion

Quasi-delicts under Philippine Civil Law are pivotal in addressing civil wrongs arising from negligence or fault, ensuring that victims are compensated for damages. The principles emphasize accountability, the duty of care, and fairness in apportioning liability. Understanding these principles equips parties to address civil liabilities and protects the rights of those who suffer harm.