Lawyerly

GR No. 174477

2009-10-02

BRION, J.

The RTC awarded the amount of P42,300.00 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P29,320.00 were duly supported by receipts. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[94]

GR No. 171453

2009-06-18

PEOPLE v. MANUEL DELPINO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

As to the award of P10,000.00 as actual damages, the same was based on the testimony of Marilyn Lorica that she spent the said amount for the wake, burial and internment of her husband.[47] Other than her statement, no other proof was presented to justify the award of actual damages. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[48] Here, no receipts were ever presented to show that Marilyn spent the said amount which was awarded by the trial court. Thus, the award of actual damages is hereby deleted for lack of factual and legal basis. Nonetheless, the accused should pay the heirs of the victim temperate damages under Article 2224 of the Civil Code[49] in the amount of P25,000.00.[50]

GR No. 173248

2008-11-03

PEOPLE v. DANTE NUEVA Y SAMARO

BRION, J.

The RTC awarded the amount of P56,112.00 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P55,438.00 was duly supported by receipts. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[49]

GR No. 172696

2008-08-11

PEOPLE v. BENITO BALLESTEROS Y GRAGASIN

BRION, J.

The RTC awarded the amount of P66,090.50 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P16,591.00[48] were supported by receipts. The difference consists of the unreceipted amounts claimed by Reyes' heirs. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[49]

GR No. 131117

2004-06-15

PEOPLE v. NELSON CARIÑO

CALLEJO, SR., J.

Conformably with recent jurisprudence, we sustain the amount of P50,000 for civil indemnity to the heirs of the deceased without need of any further proof.[57] Exemplary damages of P25,000[58] must, likewise, be awarded, in accordance with Article 2230 of the Civil Code because of the attendance of the qualifying circumstance of treachery.[59] However, the award of moral damages should be deleted in the absence of any sufficient evidence to support the same.[60] The heirs of the victim are, however, entitled to temperate damages.[61]

GR No. 133440

2004-06-07

PEOPLE v. VIRGILIO REFORMA Y PEDRIGAL

CALLEJO, SR., J.

The trial court correctly awarded P50,000 by way of civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim Nazario Damian. However, the award of P50,000 for moral damages should be deleted, there being no proof that the heirs of the victim suffered wounded feelings, mental anguish, anxiety and similar injury. The said heirs are, however, entitled to an award of P25,000 as temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence.[24]

GR No. 138984

2004-06-04

PEOPLE v. DENNIS TORPIO Y ESTRERA

CALLEJO, SR., J.

It is, likewise, necessary to modify the damages awarded by the trial court. The award of P100,000 as actual damages representing funeral and wake expenses should be deleted as there were no receipts or any other tangible documents presented to support the said award.[22] However, the award of attorney's fees in the amount of P50,000 is proper considering that the records showed that the heirs of the victim engaged the services of a private prosecutor. The recovery of attorney's fees in the concept of actual or compensatory damages is allowed under the circumstances provided in Article 2208 of the Civil Code, one of which is when the court deems it just and equitable that attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered.[23] The award of P50,000 as civil indemnity[24] to the heirs of Anthony, as well as P25,000 as temperate damages,[25] is, likewise, warranted pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.

GR No. 147196

2004-06-04

PEOPLE v. EDGAR DUMADAG Y CAGADAS

CALLEJO, SR., J.

The trial court correctly awarded P50,000 by way of civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim Fernando "Ondo" Prudente. However, the award of P50,000 for moral damages should be deleted, there being no proof that the heirs of the victim suffered wounded feelings, mental anguish, anxiety and similar injury. The said heirs are, instead, entitled to an award of P25,000 as temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence.[43]

GR No. 123939

2004-05-28

PEOPLE v. DOMINGO VASQUEZ Y PACHECO

CALLEJO, SR., J.

In lieu of actual damages in the amount of P18,000.00, the heirs of the victim are entitled to P25,000.00 by way of temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence. The amount of P1,500,000.00 is deleted for failure of the prosecution to adduce any documentary and oral evidence to prove the factual basis of such amount.[28] The award of moral damages should be increased to P50,000.00 to conform to current jurisprudence. Luis Luable is entitled to P25,000.00 exemplary damages.[29]

GR No. 140680

2004-05-28

PEOPLE v. RENY DE LOS REYES

CALLEJO, SR., J.

However, the trial court erred in ordering the appellant to pay the victim's heirs P75,000 as civil indemnity; P75,000 as moral damages; and P5,000 as funeral expenses. The amount of P75,000 as indemnity for the death of the victim shall be reduced to P50,000, based on prevailing jurisprudence.[46] Also, the amount of P50,000 by way of moral damages is considered sufficient. In People v. Galvez,[47] this Court stressed that the purpose of the award of moral damages is not to enrich the heirs of the victim but to compensate them for the injuries to their feelings. The prosecution adduced evidence that the heirs of the victim spent for the funeral and the wake, but that the said expenses amount to less than P25,000. Conformably to current jurisprudence, the heirs of the victim are entitled to temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.[48]

GR No. 137585

2004-04-28

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO ROM Y SARDEDO

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The actual damages in the amount of P5,850.00 should be increased to P25,000.00, not as actual damages but as temperate damages, per this Court's ruling in People vs. De Los Santos.[15]

GR No. 152966

2004-03-17

PEOPLE v. JERRY SE

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

of which was substantiated by receipts,[43] they are entitled to temperate damages which current jurisprudence set at P25,000.00. The said amount is awarded where there is no sufficient proof of actual damages, or if the actual damages proven, as in the present case, is less than P25,000.00.[44] WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Ligao City in Criminal Case No. 4129 is MODIFIED. Appellant Jerry Se is convicted beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Homicide and is sentenced to suffer the

GR Nos. 132310 & 143968-69

2004-01-20

PEOPLE v. FELIPE DEMATE Y LOGANA

QUISUMBING, J.

There are two tests for nocturnity as an aggravating circumstance. First is the objective test, under which nocturnity is aggravating because it facilitates the commission of the offense. Second is the subjective test, under which nocturnity is aggravating because it was purposely sought by the offender. The two tests should be applied in the alternative.[65] When appellant Demate asked the housemaid to let him inside her master's house at 3:00 a.m., we can grant that the subjective test was passed. However, in the imposition of the penalty on appellants, we cannot appreciate the aggravating circumstance of nighttime for two reasons. First, the aggravating circumstance of nighttime is already absorbed by treachery.[66] Second, the Information in Criminal Case No. 8511 did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstance of nighttime. Under the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure, which should be given retroactive effect following the rule that statutes governing court proceedings will be construed as applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage,[67] every Information must state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances.[68] Hence, since the aggravating circumstance of nighttime was not alleged in the Information in Criminal Case No. 8511, it could not be appreciated against the appellants.

GR No. 125966

2004-01-13

PEOPLE v. JUAN FACTAO

TINGA, J,

While Fernando Sardoma's widow Virgilia testified that she incurred P30,000.00 in expenses for her late husband's two-week wake,[96] apart from the coffin, which cost P10,000.00, including the service,[97] such testimony was not supported by a single receipt. Accordingly, the award of P10,000.00 for the coffin and another P10,000.00 for the wake and funeral expenses by the RTC is deleted.[98] However, they may be awarded temperate damage of P25,000.00 from each guilty appellant[99]

GR No. 123298

2003-11-27

PEOPLE v. FRANCISCO L. CALPITO

AZCUNA, J.

On the matter of appellant's civil liability, this Court finds it appropriate to impose additional damages in line with prevailing jurisprudence: exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000[28] and temperate damages in the amount of P25,000. [29] The civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000 is sustained.

GR No. 122103

2003-11-04

PEOPLE v. WILFREDO PABILLO

TINGA, J.

On the matter of appellant's civil liability ex delicto, it has been the ruling of the Court to outrightly award P50,000.00 as indemnity to the heirs of the victim.[50] Thus, we uphold the trial court's award of P50,000.00 as damages. Moreover, as ruled in People vs. De Los Santos,[51] an additional award of P25,000.00 as temperate damages is justified in the absence of proof for the award of actual damages, and a further P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, in accordance with our ruling in People v. Nicolas.[52]

GR No. 152135

2003-10-23

PEOPLE v. MARCOS GIALOLO

PUNO, J.

We now come to the award of damages. The trial court awarded the heirs of the victim the following: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P50,000.00 as moral damages; and P20,000.00 as actual damages. We reduce the award of civil indemnity to P50,000.00 in line with existing jurisprudence.[33] We disallow the award of actual damages as not a single receipt was presented to support the expenses allegedly incurred by the heirs of the victim. In lieu thereof, we award temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00.[34] Similarly, we delete the award of moral damages for lack of evidence.

GR No. 140762

2003-09-10

PEOPLE v. PO3 ROGER ROXAS Y CABASAG

VITUG, J.

The trial court awarded "indemnity damages" of P50,000.00 and exemplary damages of P100,000.00. Civil indemnity is automatically imposed upon the accused without need of proof other than the fact of the commission of murder or homicide.[24] The award should thus be affirmed. The award of exemplary damages is justified considering the attendance of the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength that qualified the killing to murder but, considering prevailing jurisprudence, that amount should be reduced to P25,000.00.[25] Consistently likewise with recent decisions of the Court, an award of only temperate damages of P25,000.00, no adequate proof of actual damages having been shown, is warranted.[26]

GR No. 136299

2003-08-29

PEOPLE v. ZOILO MAGALLANES

PER CURIAM

No actual damages were awarded by the trial court since the prosecution failed to prove any amount thereof. To be entitled to such damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[38] However, in accordance with our recent ruling in the case of People vs. Abrazaldo,[39] we hereby grant temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00 on the ground that it was reasonable to expect that the family of the victim incurred expenses for the coffin, burial and food during the wake.[40]

	GR No. 174477 2009-10-02	PEOPLE v. RENATO BRACIA BRION, J.
The RTC awarded the amount of P42,300.00 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P29,320.00 were duly supported by receipts. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[94]
	GR No. 171453 2009-06-18	PEOPLE v. MANUEL DELPINO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
As to the award of P10,000.00 as actual damages, the same was based on the testimony of Marilyn Lorica that she spent the said amount for the wake, burial and internment of her husband.[47] Other than her statement, no other proof was presented to justify the award of actual damages. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[48] Here, no receipts were ever presented to show that Marilyn spent the said amount which was awarded by the trial court. Thus, the award of actual damages is hereby deleted for lack of factual and legal basis. Nonetheless, the accused should pay the heirs of the victim temperate damages under Article 2224 of the Civil Code[49] in the amount of P25,000.00.[50]
	GR No. 173248 2008-11-03	PEOPLE v. DANTE NUEVA Y SAMARO BRION, J.
The RTC awarded the amount of P56,112.00 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P55,438.00 was duly supported by receipts. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[49]
	GR No. 172696 2008-08-11	PEOPLE v. BENITO BALLESTEROS Y GRAGASIN BRION, J.
The RTC awarded the amount of P66,090.50 to the victim's heirs as actual damages. It appears that out of the said amount, only P16,591.00[48] were supported by receipts. The difference consists of the unreceipted amounts claimed by Reyes' heirs. To be entitled to actual damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[49]
	GR No. 131117 2004-06-15	PEOPLE v. NELSON CARIÑO CALLEJO, SR., J.
Conformably with recent jurisprudence, we sustain the amount of P50,000 for civil indemnity to the heirs of the deceased without need of any further proof.[57] Exemplary damages of P25,000[58] must, likewise, be awarded, in accordance with Article 2230 of the Civil Code because of the attendance of the qualifying circumstance of treachery.[59] However, the award of moral damages should be deleted in the absence of any sufficient evidence to support the same.[60] The heirs of the victim are, however, entitled to temperate damages.[61]
	GR No. 133440 2004-06-07	PEOPLE v. VIRGILIO REFORMA Y PEDRIGAL CALLEJO, SR., J.
The trial court correctly awarded P50,000 by way of civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim Nazario Damian. However, the award of P50,000 for moral damages should be deleted, there being no proof that the heirs of the victim suffered wounded feelings, mental anguish, anxiety and similar injury. The said heirs are, however, entitled to an award of P25,000 as temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence.[24]
	GR No. 138984 2004-06-04	PEOPLE v. DENNIS TORPIO Y ESTRERA CALLEJO, SR., J.
It is, likewise, necessary to modify the damages awarded by the trial court. The award of P100,000 as actual damages representing funeral and wake expenses should be deleted as there were no receipts or any other tangible documents presented to support the said award.[22] However, the award of attorney's fees in the amount of P50,000 is proper considering that the records showed that the heirs of the victim engaged the services of a private prosecutor. The recovery of attorney's fees in the concept of actual or compensatory damages is allowed under the circumstances provided in Article 2208 of the Civil Code, one of which is when the court deems it just and equitable that attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered.[23] The award of P50,000 as civil indemnity[24] to the heirs of Anthony, as well as P25,000 as temperate damages,[25] is, likewise, warranted pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.
	GR No. 147196 2004-06-04	PEOPLE v. EDGAR DUMADAG Y CAGADAS CALLEJO, SR., J.
The trial court correctly awarded P50,000 by way of civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim Fernando "Ondo" Prudente. However, the award of P50,000 for moral damages should be deleted, there being no proof that the heirs of the victim suffered wounded feelings, mental anguish, anxiety and similar injury. The said heirs are, instead, entitled to an award of P25,000 as temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence.[43]
	GR No. 123939 2004-05-28	PEOPLE v. DOMINGO VASQUEZ Y PACHECO CALLEJO, SR., J.
In lieu of actual damages in the amount of P18,000.00, the heirs of the victim are entitled to P25,000.00 by way of temperate damages, conformably to current jurisprudence. The amount of P1,500,000.00 is deleted for failure of the prosecution to adduce any documentary and oral evidence to prove the factual basis of such amount.[28] The award of moral damages should be increased to P50,000.00 to conform to current jurisprudence. Luis Luable is entitled to P25,000.00 exemplary damages.[29]
	GR No. 140680 2004-05-28	PEOPLE v. RENY DE LOS REYES CALLEJO, SR., J.
However, the trial court erred in ordering the appellant to pay the victim's heirs P75,000 as civil indemnity; P75,000 as moral damages; and P5,000 as funeral expenses. The amount of P75,000 as indemnity for the death of the victim shall be reduced to P50,000, based on prevailing jurisprudence.[46] Also, the amount of P50,000 by way of moral damages is considered sufficient. In People v. Galvez,[47] this Court stressed that the purpose of the award of moral damages is not to enrich the heirs of the victim but to compensate them for the injuries to their feelings. The prosecution adduced evidence that the heirs of the victim spent for the funeral and the wake, but that the said expenses amount to less than P25,000. Conformably to current jurisprudence, the heirs of the victim are entitled to temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.[48]
	GR No. 137585 2004-04-28	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO ROM Y SARDEDO AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The actual damages in the amount of P5,850.00 should be increased to P25,000.00, not as actual damages but as temperate damages, per this Court's ruling in People vs. De Los Santos.[15]
	GR No. 152966 2004-03-17	PEOPLE v. JERRY SE YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
of which was substantiated by receipts,[43] they are entitled to temperate damages which current jurisprudence set at P25,000.00. The said amount is awarded where there is no sufficient proof of actual damages, or if the actual damages proven, as in the present case, is less than P25,000.00.[44] WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Ligao City in Criminal Case No. 4129 is MODIFIED. Appellant Jerry Se is convicted beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Homicide and is sentenced to suffer the
	GR Nos. 132310 & 143968-69 2004-01-20	PEOPLE v. FELIPE DEMATE Y LOGANA QUISUMBING, J.
There are two tests for nocturnity as an aggravating circumstance. First is the objective test, under which nocturnity is aggravating because it facilitates the commission of the offense. Second is the subjective test, under which nocturnity is aggravating because it was purposely sought by the offender. The two tests should be applied in the alternative.[65] When appellant Demate asked the housemaid to let him inside her master's house at 3:00 a.m., we can grant that the subjective test was passed. However, in the imposition of the penalty on appellants, we cannot appreciate the aggravating circumstance of nighttime for two reasons. First, the aggravating circumstance of nighttime is already absorbed by treachery.[66] Second, the Information in Criminal Case No. 8511 did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstance of nighttime. Under the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure, which should be given retroactive effect following the rule that statutes governing court proceedings will be construed as applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage,[67] every Information must state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances.[68] Hence, since the aggravating circumstance of nighttime was not alleged in the Information in Criminal Case No. 8511, it could not be appreciated against the appellants.
	GR No. 125966 2004-01-13	PEOPLE v. JUAN FACTAO TINGA, J,
While Fernando Sardoma's widow Virgilia testified that she incurred P30,000.00 in expenses for her late husband's two-week wake,[96] apart from the coffin, which cost P10,000.00, including the service,[97] such testimony was not supported by a single receipt. Accordingly, the award of P10,000.00 for the coffin and another P10,000.00 for the wake and funeral expenses by the RTC is deleted.[98] However, they may be awarded temperate damage of P25,000.00 from each guilty appellant[99]
	GR No. 123298 2003-11-27	PEOPLE v. FRANCISCO L. CALPITO AZCUNA, J.
On the matter of appellant's civil liability, this Court finds it appropriate to impose additional damages in line with prevailing jurisprudence: exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000[28] and temperate damages in the amount of P25,000. [29] The civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000 is sustained.
	GR No. 122103 2003-11-04	PEOPLE v. WILFREDO PABILLO TINGA, J.
On the matter of appellant's civil liability ex delicto, it has been the ruling of the Court to outrightly award P50,000.00 as indemnity to the heirs of the victim.[50] Thus, we uphold the trial court's award of P50,000.00 as damages. Moreover, as ruled in People vs. De Los Santos,[51] an additional award of P25,000.00 as temperate damages is justified in the absence of proof for the award of actual damages, and a further P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, in accordance with our ruling in People v. Nicolas.[52]
	GR No. 152135 2003-10-23	PEOPLE v. MARCOS GIALOLO PUNO, J.
We now come to the award of damages. The trial court awarded the heirs of the victim the following: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P50,000.00 as moral damages; and P20,000.00 as actual damages. We reduce the award of civil indemnity to P50,000.00 in line with existing jurisprudence.[33] We disallow the award of actual damages as not a single receipt was presented to support the expenses allegedly incurred by the heirs of the victim. In lieu thereof, we award temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00.[34] Similarly, we delete the award of moral damages for lack of evidence.
	GR No. 140762 2003-09-10	PEOPLE v. PO3 ROGER ROXAS Y CABASAG VITUG, J.
The trial court awarded "indemnity damages" of P50,000.00 and exemplary damages of P100,000.00. Civil indemnity is automatically imposed upon the accused without need of proof other than the fact of the commission of murder or homicide.[24] The award should thus be affirmed. The award of exemplary damages is justified considering the attendance of the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength that qualified the killing to murder but, considering prevailing jurisprudence, that amount should be reduced to P25,000.00.[25] Consistently likewise with recent decisions of the Court, an award of only temperate damages of P25,000.00, no adequate proof of actual damages having been shown, is warranted.[26]
	GR No. 136299 2003-08-29	PEOPLE v. ZOILO MAGALLANES PER CURIAM
No actual damages were awarded by the trial court since the prosecution failed to prove any amount thereof. To be entitled to such damages, it is necessary to prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[38] However, in accordance with our recent ruling in the case of People vs. Abrazaldo,[39] we hereby grant temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00 on the ground that it was reasonable to expect that the family of the victim incurred expenses for the coffin, burial and food during the wake.[40]

PEOPLE v. DANNY DELOS SANTOS Y FERNANDEZ