Lawyerly

GR No. 190862

2013-10-09

SERENO, C.J.

As to the award of damages to the heirs of each victim, we find that the awards of civil indemnity and temperate damages made by the CA in the amounts of P75,000 and P25,000, respectively, are in keeping with prevailing jurisprudence.[46] However, considering that the penalty imposed should have been death but was reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, the amount of moral damages is increased from P50,000 to P75,000, and the award of exemplary damages from P25,000 to P30,000.[47] These awards shall earn interest at the rate of 6% from the finality of this Decision until fully paid.[48]

GR No. 175926

2011-07-06

PEOPLE v. RESTITUTO CARANDANG

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

The civil liabilities of appellants should, however, be modified in accordance with current jurisprudence. Thus, in Criminal Case Nos. Q-01-100061 and Q-01-100062, the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for each victim must be increased to P75,000.00. [54] In cases of murder and homicide, civil indemnity of P75,000.00 and moral damages of P50,000.00 are awarded automatically, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. [55] Appellants are furthermore solidarily liable to each victim for P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, which is awarded when the crime was committed with an aggravating circumstance, be it generic or qualifying. [56] However, since Carandang did not appeal, he is only solidarily liable with Milan and Chua with respect to the amounts awarded by the Court of Appeals, since the Court of Appeals' Decision has become final and executory with respect to him. The additional amounts (P25,000.00 as civil indemnity and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages) shall be borne only by Milan and Chua, who are hereby held liable therefor solidarily.

GR No. 178771

2011-06-08

PEOPLE v. ALBERTO ANTICAMARA Y CABILLO

PERALTA, J.

Anent moral damages, the same are mandatory in cases of murder, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. [64] However, consistent with recent jurisprudence on heinous crimes where the imposable penalty is death but reduced to reclusion perpetua pursuant to R.A. No. 9346, the award of moral damages should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00. [65]

GR No. 189301

2010-12-15

PEOPLE v. JOSE PEPITO D. COMBATE

VELASCO JR., J.

When death occurs due to a crime, the following may be recovered: (1) civil indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim; (2) actual or compensatory damages; (3) moral damages; (4) exemplary damages; (5) attorney's fees and expenses of litigation; and (6) interest, in proper cases.[59] In People v. Tubongbanua,[60] interest at the rate of six percent (6%) was ordered to be applied on the award of damages. This rule would be subsequently applied by the Court in several cases such as Mendoza v. People,[61] People v. Buban,[62] People v. Guevarra,[63] and People v. Regalario.[64] Thus, we likewise adopt this rule in the instant case. Interest of six percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the award of civil indemnity and all damages, i.e., actual or compensatory damages, moral damages and exemplary damages, from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.

GR No. 188610

2010-06-29

PEOPLE v. ALBERT SANCHEZ Y GALERA

VELASCO JR., J.

The Court, however, modifies the award of moral damages, which is mandatory in homicide and murder without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim.[40] To conform with recent jurisprudence on heinous crimes where the proper imposable penalty is death, if not for R.A. 9346, the award of moral damages is increased to PhP 75,000 for each count of murder.[41] The award of exemplary damages in the amount of PhP 30,000 is additionally in order if, as here, the crime was committed with an aggravating circumstance, be it generic or qualifying.[42] The Court thus grants the same to serve as deterrent to serious wrongdoings, as a vindication of the wanton invasion of the rights of the victims, or punishment for those guilty of outrageous conduct.[43]

GR No. 188320

2010-06-29

PEOPLE v. RIO TIBON Y DEISO

VELASCO JR., J.

The Solicitor General recommended the reduction of civil indemnity from PhP75,000 to PhP50,000. However, recent jurisprudence pegs civil indemnity in the amount of PhP75,000,[27] which is automatically granted to the offended party, or his/her heirs in case of the former's death, without need of further evidence other than the fact of the commission of murder, homicide, parricide and rape.[28] People v. Regalario[29] has explained that the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the commission of the offense.

GR No. 188331

2010-06-16

PEOPLE v. RYAN LALONGISIP Y DELOS ANGELES

NACHURA, J.

part of the person defending himself. Of these elements, the accused must, initially, prove unlawful aggression, because without it, there can be no self-defense, either complete or incomplete.[9]

GR No. 177740

2010-04-05

PEOPLE v. ROMULO GARCIA Y MACEDA

VILLARAMA, JR., J.

Also, in rape cases, moral damages are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape, because it is assumed that the victim has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award. The moral damages awarded in the instant case, however, should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 pursuant to current jurisprudence on qualified rape. [41] Exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00 are also called for, [42] by way of public example, and to protect the young from sexual abuse. [43]

GR No. 185726

2009-10-16

PEOPLE v. DARWIN BERNABE Y GARCIA

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

As to damages awarded by the CA, modification is in order. When death occurs as a result of a crime, the heirs of the deceased are entitled to civil indemnity for the death of the victim without need of proof of damages. Prevailing jurisprudence dictates the award of civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00.[37] Likewise, the awarded moral damages should be increased to P75,000.00 and the exemplary damages increased to P30,000.00 to conform with current jurisprudence.[38]

GR No. 169641

2009-09-10

PEOPLE v. RICHARD O. SARCIA

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

In sum, the increased amount of P75,000.00 each as civil indemnity and moral damages should be maintained. It is also proper and appropriate that the award of exemplary damages be likewise increased to the amount of P30,000.00 based on the latest jurisprudence on the award of damages on qualified rape. Thus, the CA correctly awarded P75,000.00 as civil indemnity. However the award of P50,000.00 as moral damages is increased to P75,000.00[44] and that of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages is likewise increased to P30,000.00.[45]

GR No. 175605

2009-08-28

PEOPLE v. ARNOLD GARCHITORENA Y CAMBA A.KA. JUNIOR

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the CA in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00765, finding the three-accused appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder is hereby AFFIRMED WITH the following MODIFICATIONS: (1) the penalty of death imposed on accused-appellants is REDUCED to RECLUSION PERPETUA without eligibility for parole pursuant to RA 9346; (2) the monetary awards to be paid jointly and severally by the accused-appellants to the heirs of the victim are as follows: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages; (3) P408,000.00 for loss of earning capacity; and (4) interest is imposed on all the damages awarded at the legal rate of 6% from this date until fully paid.[37]

GR No. 168693

2009-06-19

PEOPLE v. JESSIE MARIANO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

As to the damages, we have held that if the rape is perpetrated with any of the attending qualifying aggravating circumstances that require the imposition of the death penalty, the civil indemnity for the victim shall be P75,000.00. Thus, the award of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity made by the courts a quo is in line with existing case law. Also, in rape cases, moral damages are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape, because it is assumed that the victim has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award. However, the moral damages awarded in the instant case should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 pursuant to current jurisprudence on qualified rape.[37] Lastly, exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000 is also called for,[38] by way of public example, and to protect the young from sexual abuse.[39]

GR No. 178301

2009-04-24

PEOPLE v. ROLANDO 'BOTONG' MALIBIRAN ACCUSED

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

In the recent case of People v. Regalario,[44] the Court stated:While the new law prohibits the imposition of the death penalty, the penalty provided for by law for a heinous offense is still death and the offense is still heinous. Consequently, the civil indemnity for the victim is still P75,000.00. x x x the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the commission of the offense.

	GR No. 190862 2013-10-09	PEOPLE v. RICARDO DEARO SERENO, C.J.
As to the award of damages to the heirs of each victim, we find that the awards of civil indemnity and temperate damages made by the CA in the amounts of P75,000 and P25,000, respectively, are in keeping with prevailing jurisprudence.[46] However, considering that the penalty imposed should have been death but was reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, the amount of moral damages is increased from P50,000 to P75,000, and the award of exemplary damages from P25,000 to P30,000.[47] These awards shall earn interest at the rate of 6% from the finality of this Decision until fully paid.[48]
	GR No. 175926 2011-07-06	PEOPLE v. RESTITUTO CARANDANG LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The civil liabilities of appellants should, however, be modified in accordance with current jurisprudence. Thus, in Criminal Case Nos. Q-01-100061 and Q-01-100062, the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for each victim must be increased to P75,000.00. [54] In cases of murder and homicide, civil indemnity of P75,000.00 and moral damages of P50,000.00 are awarded automatically, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. [55] Appellants are furthermore solidarily liable to each victim for P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, which is awarded when the crime was committed with an aggravating circumstance, be it generic or qualifying. [56] However, since Carandang did not appeal, he is only solidarily liable with Milan and Chua with respect to the amounts awarded by the Court of Appeals, since the Court of Appeals' Decision has become final and executory with respect to him. The additional amounts (P25,000.00 as civil indemnity and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages) shall be borne only by Milan and Chua, who are hereby held liable therefor solidarily.
	GR No. 178771 2011-06-08	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO ANTICAMARA Y CABILLO PERALTA, J.
Anent moral damages, the same are mandatory in cases of murder, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. [64] However, consistent with recent jurisprudence on heinous crimes where the imposable penalty is death but reduced to reclusion perpetua pursuant to R.A. No. 9346, the award of moral damages should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00. [65]
	GR No. 189301 2010-12-15	PEOPLE v. JOSE PEPITO D. COMBATE VELASCO JR., J.
When death occurs due to a crime, the following may be recovered: (1) civil indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim; (2) actual or compensatory damages; (3) moral damages; (4) exemplary damages; (5) attorney's fees and expenses of litigation; and (6) interest, in proper cases.[59] In People v. Tubongbanua,[60] interest at the rate of six percent (6%) was ordered to be applied on the award of damages. This rule would be subsequently applied by the Court in several cases such as Mendoza v. People,[61] People v. Buban,[62] People v. Guevarra,[63] and People v. Regalario.[64] Thus, we likewise adopt this rule in the instant case. Interest of six percent (6%) per annum should be imposed on the award of civil indemnity and all damages, i.e., actual or compensatory damages, moral damages and exemplary damages, from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.
	GR No. 188610 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. ALBERT SANCHEZ Y GALERA VELASCO JR., J.
The Court, however, modifies the award of moral damages, which is mandatory in homicide and murder without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim.[40] To conform with recent jurisprudence on heinous crimes where the proper imposable penalty is death, if not for R.A. 9346, the award of moral damages is increased to PhP 75,000 for each count of murder.[41] The award of exemplary damages in the amount of PhP 30,000 is additionally in order if, as here, the crime was committed with an aggravating circumstance, be it generic or qualifying.[42] The Court thus grants the same to serve as deterrent to serious wrongdoings, as a vindication of the wanton invasion of the rights of the victims, or punishment for those guilty of outrageous conduct.[43]
	GR No. 188320 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. RIO TIBON Y DEISO VELASCO JR., J.
The Solicitor General recommended the reduction of civil indemnity from PhP75,000 to PhP50,000. However, recent jurisprudence pegs civil indemnity in the amount of PhP75,000,[27] which is automatically granted to the offended party, or his/her heirs in case of the former's death, without need of further evidence other than the fact of the commission of murder, homicide, parricide and rape.[28] People v. Regalario[29] has explained that the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the commission of the offense.
	GR No. 188331 2010-06-16	PEOPLE v. RYAN LALONGISIP Y DELOS ANGELES NACHURA, J.
part of the person defending himself. Of these elements, the accused must, initially, prove unlawful aggression, because without it, there can be no self-defense, either complete or incomplete.[9]
	GR No. 177740 2010-04-05	PEOPLE v. ROMULO GARCIA Y MACEDA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Also, in rape cases, moral damages are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape, because it is assumed that the victim has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award. The moral damages awarded in the instant case, however, should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 pursuant to current jurisprudence on qualified rape. [41] Exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00 are also called for, [42] by way of public example, and to protect the young from sexual abuse. [43]
	GR No. 185726 2009-10-16	PEOPLE v. DARWIN BERNABE Y GARCIA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
As to damages awarded by the CA, modification is in order. When death occurs as a result of a crime, the heirs of the deceased are entitled to civil indemnity for the death of the victim without need of proof of damages. Prevailing jurisprudence dictates the award of civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00.[37] Likewise, the awarded moral damages should be increased to P75,000.00 and the exemplary damages increased to P30,000.00 to conform with current jurisprudence.[38]
	GR No. 169641 2009-09-10	PEOPLE v. RICHARD O. SARCIA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
In sum, the increased amount of P75,000.00 each as civil indemnity and moral damages should be maintained. It is also proper and appropriate that the award of exemplary damages be likewise increased to the amount of P30,000.00 based on the latest jurisprudence on the award of damages on qualified rape. Thus, the CA correctly awarded P75,000.00 as civil indemnity. However the award of P50,000.00 as moral damages is increased to P75,000.00[44] and that of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages is likewise increased to P30,000.00.[45]
	GR No. 175605 2009-08-28	PEOPLE v. ARNOLD GARCHITORENA Y CAMBA A.KA. JUNIOR LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the CA in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00765, finding the three-accused appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder is hereby AFFIRMED WITH the following MODIFICATIONS: (1) the penalty of death imposed on accused-appellants is REDUCED to RECLUSION PERPETUA without eligibility for parole pursuant to RA 9346; (2) the monetary awards to be paid jointly and severally by the accused-appellants to the heirs of the victim are as follows: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages; (3) P408,000.00 for loss of earning capacity; and (4) interest is imposed on all the damages awarded at the legal rate of 6% from this date until fully paid.[37]
	GR No. 168693 2009-06-19	PEOPLE v. JESSIE MARIANO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
As to the damages, we have held that if the rape is perpetrated with any of the attending qualifying aggravating circumstances that require the imposition of the death penalty, the civil indemnity for the victim shall be P75,000.00. Thus, the award of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity made by the courts a quo is in line with existing case law. Also, in rape cases, moral damages are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape, because it is assumed that the victim has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award. However, the moral damages awarded in the instant case should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 pursuant to current jurisprudence on qualified rape.[37] Lastly, exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000 is also called for,[38] by way of public example, and to protect the young from sexual abuse.[39]
	GR No. 178301 2009-04-24	PEOPLE v. ROLANDO 'BOTONG' MALIBIRAN ACCUSED AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In the recent case of People v. Regalario,[44] the Court stated:While the new law prohibits the imposition of the death penalty, the penalty provided for by law for a heinous offense is still death and the offense is still heinous. Consequently, the civil indemnity for the victim is still P75,000.00. x x x the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the commission of the offense.

PEOPLE v. RAMON REGALARIO