CASE 2016-0086: WILLIAM ENRIQUEZ AND NELIA-VELA ENRIQUEZ, PETITIONERS, -VERSUS ISAROG LINE TRANSPORT AND VICTOR SEDENIO, RESPONDENTS (G.R. NO. 212008, 16 NOV 2016, PERALTA, J.) (SUBJECT/S: INDEMNITY FOR LOSS OF CAPACITY TO EARN; EVIDENCE NOT OBJECTED TO IS ADMISSIBLE.) (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES ENRIQUEZ VS. ISAROG LINE TRANSPORT ET AL.)
DISPOSITIVE:
“WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court GRANTS the petition and SETS ASIDE the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated June 13, 2013 and Resolution dated March 4, 2014 in CAG.R. CV No. 97376, and REINSTATES the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Libmanan, Camarines Sur, Branch 29 dated February 24, 2011 in Civil Case No. L-896, with interest at six percent (6%)14 per annum of the amount of damages awarded from the time of the finality of this Decision until its full satisfaction.
SO ORDERED.”
SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:
WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?
SONNY ENRIQUEZ WAS A PASSENGER OF ISAROG LINE BUS. HE WAS KILLED WHEN THEIR BUS COLLIDED WITH ANOTHER BUS.
HIS PARENTS, THE PETITIONERS WERE CLAIMING FOR INDEMNITY FOR LOSS OF EARNING OF SONNY. RTC RULED THEY ARE ENTITLED TO P1,038,960.00. CA REVERSED RTC RULING. HENCE THIS CASE.
WHAT IS THE SOLE ISSUE TO BE RESOLVED?
WHETHER OR NOT THE SPOUSES ENRIQUEZ ARE ENTITLED TO THE AMOUNT OF PL,038,960.00 AS DAMAGES FOR THEIR SON’S LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY.
WHAT IS THE BASIS IN LAW OF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIM FOR INDEMNITY?
UNDER ARTICLE 2206 OF THE CIVIL CODE, THE HEIRS OF THE VICTIM ARE ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY FOR LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY, THUS:
Article 2206. The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least three thousand pesos, even though there may have been mitigating circumstances. In addition:
( 1) The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death;
xxx
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF SAID INDEMNITY?
COMPENSATION OF THIS NATURE IS AWARDED NOT FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS, BUT FOR LOSS OF CAPACITY TO EARN.
WHAT TYPE OF DAMAGES IS THIS INDEMNITY?
IT IS IN THE NATURE OF ACTUAL DAMAGES.
AS SUCH IT MUST BE DULY PROVEN BY COMPETENT PROOF AND THE BEST OBTAINABLE EVIDENCE THEREOF.
WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE MUST BE PRESENTED?
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE EXCEPT WHEN:
(1) THE DECEASED WAS SELF-EMPLOYED AND EARNING LESS THAN THE MINIMUM WAGE UNDER CURRENT LABOR LAWS, IN WHICH CASE, JUDICIAL NOTICE MAY BE TAKEN OF THE FACT THAT IN THE DECEASED’S LINE OF WORK NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE; OR
(2) THE DECEASED WAS EMPLOYED AS A DAILY WAGE WORKER EARNING LESS THAN THE MINIMUM WAGE UNDER CURRENT LABOR LAWS.
IN THIS CASE, PLAINTIFFS PRESENTED A CERTIFICATION FROM ASIAN SECURITY SYSTEMS INC DURING TRIAL SHOWING THAT SONNY WAS EARNING P185.00 PER DAY AS SECURITY GUARD. BUT C.A. SAID THIS HAS NO PROBATIVE VALUE BECAUSE THE SIGNATORY WAS NEVER PRESENTED TO TESTIFY. WAS CA CORRECT?
NO. BECAUSE DEFENSE DID NOT OBJECT TO SAID EVIDENCE.
THE RULE IS THAT EVIDENCE NOT OBJECTED TO IS DEEMED ADMITTED AND MAY BE VALIDLY CONSIDERED BY THE COURT IN ARRIVING AT ITS JUDGMENT.
HOW WAS THE P1,038,960.00 COMPUTED?
USING THE SETTLED FORMULA, THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY IS COMPUTED AS FOLLOWS:
NET EARNING CAPACITY= LIFE EXPECTANCY X GROSS ANNUAL I 13 L. . E NCOME -1VMG XPENSES = [2/3 (80 -AGE AT DEATH)] X GAI -[50% OF GAI] = [2/3 (80 -26)] X P57,720.00 -P28,860.00 = [2/3 (54)] X P28,860.00 = 36 X P28,860.00 NET EARNING CAPACITY= PL,038,960.00
TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.
NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH JUST TYPE “jabbulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST TYPE “jabbulao and forum shopping”.
J.A.B. Bulao & Associates 