This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2015-11-23 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Also, to conform with prevailing jurisprudence,[29] the award of civil indemnity should be decreased from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00. Absent any aggravating circumstance, the award of exemplary damages should be removed. The award of temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00 is proper for failure to substantiate actual expenses and losses incurred by Duardo's heirs as a result of his death.[30] | |||||
|
2015-07-06 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| The Court, however, notes that while the penalty imposed upon petitioners is also proper, there is a need to modify the awards made in favor of Villostas. The actual damages awarded by the RTC was only P22,642.05. Hence, there is a need to award P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages in a lesser amount.[23] Also, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, the award of moral damages must be increased from P20,000.00 to P25,000.00.[24] All these awards shall earn interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum to commence from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[25] | |||||
|
2015-04-06 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| The RTC and the CA correctly held that actual damages cannot be awarded to Reynaldo due to the absence of receipts to prove the medical expenses he incurred from the incident. "Nonetheless, absent competent proof on the actual damages suffered, a party still has the option of claiming temperate damages, which may be allowed in cases where, from the nature of the case, definite proof of pecuniary loss cannot be adduced although the court is convinced that the aggrieved party suffered some pecuniary loss."[19] Since it was undisputed that Reynaldo was hospitalized due to the gunshot wounds inflicted by petitioner, albeit as observed by the RTC there was no evidence offered as to the expenses he incurred by reason thereof, Reynaldo is entitled to temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00. Aside from this, he is also entitled to moral damages of P25,000.00. These awards of damages are in accordance with settled jurisprudence.[20] An interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum must also be imposed on the awarded damages to commence from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[21] | |||||
|
2014-07-21 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| What must be realized, however, is that this Court is not a trier of facts. "[T]he jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in cases brought before it from the CA via Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure is generally limited to reviewing errors of law. This Court is not a trier of facts. In the exercise of its power of review, the findings of fact of the CA are conclusive and binding and consequently, it is not our function to analyze or weigh evidence all over again."[26] This principle applies with greater force in labor cases, where this Court has consistently held that findings of fact of the NLRC are accorded great respect and even finality,[27] especially if they coincide with those of the Labor Arbiter and are supported by substantial evidence.[28] "Judicial review by this Court does not extend to a reevaluation of the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the proper labor tribunal has based its determination."[29] Factual issues are beyond the scope of this Court's authority to review on certiorari.[30] | |||||