CIVIL LAW: QUASI-DELICTS

XI. QUASI-DELICTS > B. THE TORTFEASOR > 2. PERSONS MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR OTHERS

Under Philippine law, quasi-delicts are governed by Articles 2176 to 2194 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. A quasi-delict, or "culpa aquiliana," is a wrongful act or omission that causes damage to another, arising from negligence, and without pre-existing contractual relations between the parties. Specifically, liability may extend not only to the direct tortfeasor but also to certain individuals or entities who are made responsible for others under the law. This provision emphasizes the principle of vicarious liability.

Legal Basis

Article 2180 of the Civil Code of the Philippines: This provision enumerates specific categories of persons who are made responsible for the acts of others. The liability arises when negligence or fault can be attributed to their failure to properly supervise or control those for whom they are responsible.

Persons Made Responsible for Others

1. PARENTS

Rule: Parents are liable for the damages caused by their minor children who live with them.
Key Points:
- Parents' liability is primary and direct under Article 2180.
- The obligation stems from their duty to properly supervise and educate their children.
- The child must be living with the parents at the time of the wrongful act.
Exceptions:
- Parents are not liable if they can prove that they exercised proper diligence in supervising and controlling their children.

2. GUARDIANS

Rule: Guardians are liable for damages caused by minors or incapacitated persons under their authority and living in their custody.
Key Points:
- The liability of guardians is similar to that of parents.
- They must prove diligence of a good father of a family to avoid liability.

3. EMPLOYERS

Rule: Employers are liable for the acts or omissions of their employees when the latter act within the scope of their duties.
Key Points:
- Liability is based on the principle of respondeat superior (let the master answer).
- Employers can be held liable if the wrongful act or negligence occurs while the employee is performing their assigned tasks.
- Presumption of Negligence:
  - There is a rebuttable presumption of employer negligence in hiring, training, or supervising the employee.
  - To avoid liability, employers must prove that they exercised due diligence in the selection and supervision of their employees.
- Independent Contractors:
  - Employers are generally not liable for the acts of independent contractors unless the employer was negligent in selecting or supervising them or the contractor was performing inherently dangerous work.

4. TEACHERS AND HEADS OF ESTABLISHMENTS OF ARTS AND TRADES

Rule: Teachers or heads of educational institutions or establishments of arts and trades are responsible for damages caused by their students or apprentices while under their supervision.
Key Points:
- This applies only during school hours or while the students/apprentices are under the supervision of the institution.
- Liability arises due to the teacher's or head's failure to exercise proper diligence.
- Scope of Responsibility:
  - Teachers and school administrators are liable only during activities or times when they are directly supervising students or apprentices.
  - Liability ceases when the student is no longer under the control of the school (e.g., outside school premises).

Requisites for Vicarious Liability

Relationship:
- There must be a recognized relationship between the tortfeasor and the person made responsible (e.g., parent-child, employer-employee, teacher-student).
Supervisory Control:
- The person made responsible must have had the ability to exercise supervisory control over the tortfeasor.
Wrongful Act or Omission:
- The act or omission must have been wrongful and resulted in damages.
Failure of Diligence:
- The person made responsible failed to exercise the required diligence to prevent the harm.

Defenses Available

To avoid liability, the persons made responsible must prove due diligence in supervising the tortfeasor. This involves:

Diligence of a Good Father of a Family:
- Showing reasonable efforts to prevent the tortfeasor's wrongful acts.
Lack of Causation:
- Demonstrating that the negligence of the responsible person did not contribute to the damage caused.
Independent Acts:
- Proving that the tortfeasor acted outside the scope of supervision or employment.

Extent of Liability

Solidary Liability:
- Under Article 2194, if two or more persons are liable for a quasi-delict, their liability is solidary unless the law provides otherwise.
Recourse:
- The person held responsible may seek reimbursement from the tortfeasor if their liability is purely vicarious and they are not themselves at fault.

Judicial Interpretations

Liability of Parents (Art. 2180):
- Case law consistently holds parents liable for the negligent acts of their minor children unless proper supervision can be proven.
Employer-Employee Relationship:
- The courts emphasize the need for employers to exercise due diligence in hiring and supervising employees.
- Acts done outside the scope of employment generally do not impose liability on employers.
School Liability:
- The liability of schools and teachers often hinges on the presence of supervision at the time of the tortious act.

Conclusion

The doctrine of vicarious liability under Article 2180 of the Civil Code serves to emphasize the duty of certain individuals to exercise diligence over those under their control. Failure to do so exposes them to liability for damages caused by the acts of those they are obligated to supervise. The law, however, provides safeguards by allowing them to prove diligence to escape liability, balancing accountability with fairness.