This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2003-11-27 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| In addition, the trial court should have also ordered appellant to pay the victim P50,000.00 as civil indemnity ex delicto. In People v. Padrigone,[19] citing People v. Belga, [20] we held that civil indemnity is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape; it is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion. | |||||
|
2003-07-25 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| As to the damages awarded, the trial court granted civil indemnity of P75,000, which is more than the amount of P50,000 awarded under prevailing jurisprudence to victims of rape.[27] On the other hand, the trial court correctly ruled that P50,000 be awarded as moral damages for the mental, physical and psychological suffering undeniably sustained by a rape victim.[28] | |||||
|
2003-07-25 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| It just goes to show that no young and decent Filipina would publicly admit that she was ravished and her honor tainted unless the same were true, for it would be instinctive on her part to protect her honor and obtain justice for the wicked acts committed upon her. Not to be overlooked is the complainant's willingness to face police investigators and to submit to a physical examination which are eloquent and sufficient affirmations of the truth of her charge.[11] | |||||
|
2003-02-11 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| On the matter of damages, the trial court ordered accused-appellant to "indemnify" the victim P100,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages. In People v. Padrigone,[12] it was held that civil indemnity is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape. This is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages or, in this case, moral and exemplary damages, which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion. Thus, in accordance with current jurisprudence, accused-appellant is ordered to pay P50,000.00 as civil indemnity ex delicto. | |||||
|
2002-09-27 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion.[50] Thus, another award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity is in accord with prevailing case law.[51] All of the foregoing civil liabilities shall be borne by the two accused-appellants solidarily, pursuant to Article 110 of the Revised Penal Code. WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch 18, in Criminal Case No. CBU-41296, convicting accused-appellants Teddy Anggit and Ariel Cabiluna of the crime of rape and sentencing them to suffer the penalty | |||||
|
2002-09-05 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| cumulative; and (d) the suppression is an exercise of a privilege.[18] Be that as it may, accused-appellant may be convicted on the basis of the lone, uncorroborated testimony of the rape victim, provided that her testimony is clear, positive, convincing and otherwise consistent with human nature.[19] When a woman declares | |||||
|
2002-08-06 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape; it is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion. Thus, in line with prevailing jurisprudence which treats the imposition of civil indemnity as mandatory upon a finding of rape, accused-appellant is ordered to pay the additional amount of P50,000.00 pesos as civil indemnity ex delicto.[15] Likewise, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, the award of moral damages in the amount of P30,000.00 is increased to P50,000.00. The award of exemplary damages is deleted for lack of factual basis. | |||||